I Northern Areas - IRC...I I 822 PKN089 Northern Areas Strategic Provincial Investment Plan and...
123
I I 822 PKN089 Northern Areas Strategic Provincial Investment Plan and Project Preparation for Rural Water Supply, Sanitation and Health. Final Strategic Investment Plan VOL. II (Appendices) Wardrop - Acres Cowater International September, 1989 NESPAK. $11-?W0 $<)-&>&-2
Transcript of I Northern Areas - IRC...I I 822 PKN089 Northern Areas Strategic Provincial Investment Plan and...
I
I822 PKN089
Northern Areas
Strategic Provincial Investment Planand Project Preparation forRural Water Supply,Sanitation and Health.
Final StrategicInvestment PlanV O L . II (Appendices)
Wardrop - AcresCowater International
September, 1989 NESPAK.
$11-?W0 $<)-&>&-2
Northern Areas
Strategic Provincial Investment Planand Project Preparation forRural Water Supply,Sanitation and Health.
Final StrategicInvestment PlanV O L . II (Appendices)
j RN: £>OlI LO:
. %\\ 1 4 2
September, 1989
Wardrop - AcresCowater InternationalNESPAK.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111
LIST OF ANNEXURES
1. Supplementary Descriptive Notes on the NorthernAreas
2. Statistical Tables for the Project Area3. An Assessment of the Rural Water Supply Sector in
the Northern Areas4. A Case Study of the Community Basic Services
Programme5. Understanding and Implementing Participatory
Approaches6. Terms of Partnership for Project Implementation by
Village Organizations7. Costing Methodology for the Northern Areas8. Costing Details and Physical Targets of the
Investment Plan9. Investment Plan by District10. Alternative Scenario Analysis11, Financing Details of the Investment Plan
139
3. Note on the People's Proqram
III
Annex 1
Supplementary Descriptive Notes on the Northorn Areas
1. Stylized Facts about the Rural Economy of the |Northern Areas
2. Supplementary Information on the Local Government ISystem •
IIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
l.j Stylized Facts about the Rural Economy of the Northern Areas
Based on: James F. Oehmke and Tariq Husain. The rural economy of GilgitStaff Paper No. 87-28, Department of Apricuttural Economics, Michigan StateUniversity, East Lansing, Michigan, U.S.A., March 1987.
1. The ma.ior chanqes in infrastructure have been the improvementof road communications, especially the opening of the KarakoramHighway and the Skardu Road, and the construction or new irrigationchannels in Gilgit and Baltistan.
2. Farm technology has been improved by the introduction oftractors and machinery; biotechmcal innovations have centered onimprovements in wheat and vegetable varieties and the introductionof seed potato production in some high altitude villages.
3. Domestic technology has come to relv increasingly on importedmaterial: the use of spices in cooking: the small but growing useof kerosene for cooking (less frequently for heatinq); the growinqavailability of piped water, etc.
4. Education is of primary concern to the region's people, andparents invest substantial resources in sending their children toGilgit and Karachi for higher education. Female education,however, appears to be a low priority, except in Ismaili areas.
5. Landhoiding per household has increased as a consequence ofnew irrigation channels sponsored by AKRSP; rapid populationgrowth, however, counters this trend.
6. Men are increasingly employed as paid laborers, with themajority moving into nonfarm sectors such as construction andtourism and trekking.
7. Male seasonal and semi-permanent miqration is increasing.Some interesting patterns of the mobility of specialist labor canbe observed within the Northern Areas: ieep drivers and paintersfrom Punyal (in Gilgit District) can be found all over Gilgit;masons from Hunza can be found in large numbers in BaltistanDistrict; there is seasonal migration of unskilled labor fromBaltistan to Gilgit District at the time of wheat plantina inGilgit; and workers from Astore (in Diamer District* are reportedto be particularly skilled at the manual labor that goes into newland development in Gilgit.
8. As a result of growing male migration, women are spending moretime than before in agricultural production, both by increasing thescale of those activities that women traditionally performed, andby expanding the range of productive activities.
9. Cropping patterns are switching into products with high payoffto labor - away from labor-intensive staples, into less labor-
11. The exchange of goods and services is reivinq more heavily onexplicit contracts, formal markets and cash payments.
II
intensive fruit and high-payoff vegetables,
10. The composition of livestock is changinq to favor the more gsedentary stallfed cattle at the expense of pasturing goats andsheep. • _
IIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Supplementary Information on the Local Government System
In September 1979, the Northern Areas Local Government Order,1979, was promulgated by the Northern Areas Administration. Thisorder provided for the creation of elected local governmentinstitutions throughout the Northern Areas. Six types of localcouncils were envisaged, of which three - the Union and DistrictCouncils, and Municipal Committees - have been institutionalized.Two others - the Dehi and Markaz Counci 1 - were neverinstitutionalized, while the Town/Municipal Committees are not ofdirect relevance to the RWSS Project: these three institutions areintroduced below.
The Dehi Council
This was envisaged as the viilaqe council for allvi11 ages/settlements with more than 500 persons: when a settlementhas less than 500 persons, it is qrouped together with otherneighboring village(s) in a cluster having more than 500 persons.The Dehi Council is a non-formal body and does not constitute atier of Local Government; its members are appointed by the UnionCouncil.
Its functions are to promote and control some socialdevelopment aspects at the village level. In the water sector, itis responsible for preventing use of any source of water suspectedto be dangerous to public health; and to regulate or prohibitwatering of cattle, steeping of plants, bathing or washing near adrinking water source. For the sanitation sector, it isresponsible for the sanitation, conservancy, and adoption of othermeasures for the cleanliness of the Deh. This level of governmenthas not been actually institutionalized in the Northern Areas.
The Markaz Council
The Chairmen of the Union Councils within the jurisdiction ofa markaz are ex~officio members of the Markaz Council. Allsectoral department heads of the markaz area also become membersof the Council, but do not have the right to vote.
The Markaz Council is to undertake any function in the Markazwhich has been assigned to it by the District Council, and whichthe District Council is competent to undertake in the District.This institution was never established in the Northern Areas, andalso does not constitute a formal tier of the Local Governmentsystem.
The Town and Municipal Committees
These institutions of local government represent urbansettlements, and therefore do not concern the present project whichis aimed at water supply and sanitation for the rural settlements.
3. Notes on the People's Program
There are three main components of the People's Programme1:
II
o The main programme will concentrate on water supply, health «and sanitation, education, rural roads. I
o About 10% will cover sectors which are vital for socio-economic development not included in the main programme". •
o About 5% of total outlay will be used for pilot schemes whichtest the experience of socio-economic development schemes on •the model of those being run in the Northern Areas and Orangi. |
Under the People's Program2 funds are being allocated not on —the basis of population but on the basis of constituencies of the INational Assembly in the Provinces. In the 1988-89 budget a sumof Rs 8 million was to be distributed to each of the constituenciesin the Provinces. For the Northern Areas a lump sum grant of Rs I30 million has been allocated for 1988-89. Each of the districts •will get Rs 10 million each. Under the 1989-90 budget each of theconstituencies in the provinces will get about Rs 10 million each. •
A Federal Implementation Committee will ensure implementationof schemes in the People's Programme in accordance with the rules. «A District Committee will be appointed in each District and will Ibe led by a federally appointed administrator. This Committee will "consist of elected representatives or public spirited men.District heads of nation building departments such as Health, IEducation, Communication and Works, Public Health and LB&RD will •be ex-officio members of the Committee. After completion of theschemes under this programme they will be taken over by the •provincial departments, local councils, non-governmental |organizations and voluntary organizations for operations andmaintenance. «
IIIPeople's Programme, Introductory Brochure, Ministry of Local
Government and Rural Development, Government of Pakistan. April, •1989. I
2Personal Communication, Director General. People's worksPrograms, Ministry of Local Government and Rural Development, |Islamabad. September 5, 1989.
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Annex 2
Statistical Tables for the Project Area
1Administrative DivisionsRepresentation
and Poli ti calTable
Table 2 Profile of the Typical Rural Household
Table 3 Land Ownership and Tenure
Table 4 Share of Important Crops in Total CroppedArea
Table 5 Educational Attainment
Table 6 Housing Tenure and Quality.
Table 7 Projected Population of the Northern Area
Table 8 Projected Number of Rural Households in NorthernArea
Table 1
2. The Northern Areas do not have representation in the Nationaor Provincial Assemblies.
II
Administrative Divisions and Political Representation
District *
Gilgit Diamer Baitistan lofcaj I
Sub-divisions 5 3 4 12 •
Union Councils 39 20 46 105
INumber of elected members in:
o District Council 12 8 12 32 I
o Northern Areas Council 6 4 6 16 •
o Provincial Assembly - - -
o National Assembly - - I
Notes: I
1. The number of districts will be increased from 3 to 6 with •the implementation of the recent government decision to divide IGilgit and Baltistan Districts into two districts each, as wasbriefly the case in the 1970s. The new districts will be Ghizarin Gilgit and Ghaince in Baltistan. This change will not affect Ithe mumber of other administrative units. •
IIIIII
IIIIIII
Table 2
Profile of the Typical Rural Household
GiIgit Diamer Baitistan
A. HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION
Number of :
o adult meno adult womeno children (under 15 yrs)
2.242.003.378
2.151 .793.867.80
2 . 2 41 .892.877
B. FARM AREA PER HOUSEHOLD (HECTARES)
Cultivated Area
o orchardso annual crops
Uncultivated Area
o can be developedo cannot be developed
Average holding
0. 150.61
0.100.83
0.93
0.060.51
0.57
0.240.08
0.32
1 .08
0.250.07
0.32
1 .25
0.100.06
0.16
0.73
Source: Based on AKRSP Regional Statistics Note No. 8, District Reports of the1981 Population Census, and the 1980 Northern Areas Census of Agriculture.
Table 3
Land Ownership and Tenure
A. SIZE DISTRIBUTION OF FARM AREA
Gilqit
Size of Holding (ha)XArea
Under 0.450.4 to under 1 .01.0 to under 2.02.0 and above
XFarms XArea
11
Bai t is tan pi.ajner
XFarms
47
XArea
14
423116
223343
36143
100 100 100 100
B. LAND TENURE
Source: Northern Areas Census of Agriculture. 1980.
23
312728
352116
182354
100 100
Tenure
OwnersOwner-cum-tenantsTenants
9541
9451
63352
51472
86104
86122
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 4
Share of Important Crops in TotalCropped Area
Crop
Wheat
Maize*RiceBarley*Millet*Fodders"Vegetables6
OrchardsOther Crops
Gi lait
33
23
81153152
piamer
25
33
4-
28312
100 100
Baitistan
32
293113
22
100
•grown for grain
bincludes clover and alfalfa, and maize, barley and millets grownfor fodder.
cincludes potatoes
Source: Northern Areas Census of Agriculture, 1980.
Table 5
Educational Attainment
(all figures in percentage)
Gilgit
Adult 1
o urban
o urban
o rural
o rural
iteracy ration for:
men
women
men
women
43
17
24
4
Diamer
35
8
16
2
Adults with at leastsecondary education:
o urban men
o urban women
o rural men
o rural women
Source: District Reports, 1981 Population Census.
BaJttstan
54
14
24
2
18
4
5
0.2
12
2
9
0.2
31
8
15
0.2
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 6
Housing Tenure and Quality
(all figures in percentage)
Percentage living in own houses
o urbano rural
Persons per room
o urbano rural
Piped water inside the house
o urbano rural
Piped water outside the houses
o urbano rural
Electricity available for lighting
o urbano rural
Wood as main cooking fuel
o urbano rural
Ueban houses with
o own flush latrineo no latrine
Gilait
6495
3.34.3
420.6
382.5
608
8494
1668
piamer
7187
47
333
8.4
495
CO C
OCO
CO
1288
Baltistan
4896
2.63.6
190.2
589.9
934
9385
912
Source: District Reports, 1981 Population Census.
TOTAL POPULATION
Table 7
Projected Peculation of Northern Areas
drouth Rates: 4.35*. 3.35V 3.68V 3.8*
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
Total
1988
309,282,158,
750,
400780740
920
1989
322292164
779
.859
.253
.582
.694
1990
336.903302,044170.638
809,585
1991
351312176
840
,559.162.918
,638
1992
367323183
874
,394.097,700
.191
1993
383333190
907
.376
.920
.460
.757
1994
400.345.197,
942.
05310?469
629
1995
417356204
978
.455,666,736
.859
1996
435368212
1,016
,614.616.271
.501 1
1997
455.381.220,
.057.
212508396
115
1998
475394228
1,097
.013,288,507
,808
URBAN POPULATION Growth Rates: 6.6V 5.73V *V 5.9*
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
Total
Vof Total
BaltistanPiaiir
Total
i 1988
! 48.26817.3527,770
73.390
1988
15.6*6.1*4.9*
9.8*
1989
51,45418.3468,081
77,881
1989
15.9*6.3*4.9*
10.0*
1990
54.85019.3988,404
82,651
1990
16.3*6.4*4.9*
10.2*
1991
58.47020.5098,740
87.719
1991
16.6*6.6*4.9*
10.4*
1992
62.32921,6849.090
93,103
1992
17.0*6.7*4.9*
10.7*
1993
66.44?22.9279.453
98.822
1993
17.3*6.9*5.0*
10.9*
1994
70.82824.2409.832
j04 899
1994
17.7*7.0*5.0*
11.1*
1995
75.50225,62910,225
111.356
1995
18.1*7.2*5.0*
11.4*
1996
80.48527,09810.634
118.217
1996
18.5*7.4*5.0*
11.6*
1997
85.79728.65111.059
125,507
1997
18.8*7.5*5.0*
11.9*
1998
91.46030.29211,501
133.254
1998
19.3*7.7*5.0*
12.1*
RURAL POPULATION Growth Rates: 3.84*, 3.14*, 3.6*, 3.S*
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
Total
* of Total
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
Total
! 1988
! 261,132265,428150,970
677.530
1988
84.4*93.9*95.1*
90.2*
1989
271,405273,907156.501
701.813
1989
84.1*93.7*95.1*
90.0*
1990
282,054282,646162.234
726,934
1990
83.7*93.6*95.1*
89.8*
1991
293,089291.653168,178
752.919
1991
83.4*93.4*95.1*
89.6*
1992
305,066301,412174,610
781,088
1992
83.0*93.3*95.1*
89.3*
1993
316.934310.994181.007
808.934
1993
82.7*93.1*95.0*
89.1*
1994
329.225320.866187,638
837.729
1994
82.3*93.0*95.0*
88.9*
1995
341.953331.038194,511
867,503
199b
81.9*9<.H*95.0*
88.6*
1996
355.129341,518201,637
898.284
1996
81.5*92.6*95.0*
88.4*
1997
369,414352,857209,337
931.608
1997
81.2*92.5*95.0*
88.1*
1998
383.553363.99*217,005
964,554
1998
80.7*92.3*95.0*
87.9* '
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 8
Proiected Nuiber of Rural Housenolds in northern areas
Gilgit
Baltistan
Oiaiir
Total
1988
32,642
37,918
21,567
92.127
1989
33,926
39,130
22,357
95,413
1990
35.257
40,378
23.176
98.811
1991
36.636
41.665
24,025
102.326
1992
38.13343.05924.944
106.136
1993
39.61?
44.428
2b,858
109.903
1994
41.ISA
45.838
26,805
1L3 ?9<>
• 1995
42.544
47,291
27.78/
117.822
44
48
121
1996
,3«l.788
,^84
199/
4 h . t 7 7
48.788
ii,bos
US, I'm
4/
SI
31
I,SO
19%
,999
. 001
II
Annex 3 m
An Assessment of the Rural Water Supply Sector Iin the Northern Areas
1. Rapid Assessment of Existing Rural Water Supply Schemesin the Northern Areas: _
1. Objective and Scope of Survey •2. Summary of Findings3. Report on Gilgit District I4. Report on Baitistan District I5. Report on Diamer District
2. Existing and Planned Rural Water Supply Schemes |
1. Existing NAPWD Schemes _2. Existing LB&RD Schemes of District Councils I3. Existing LB'&RD Schemes of Community Basic Services '
Program.4. Northern Areas Council Water Supply Schemes I
(Planned). |5. UNICEF Assisted Water Supply Schemes (Planned)6. Cost Analysis of Rural Water Supply Schemes, Public •
Works Department I7. Cost Analysis of Rural Water Supply Schemes, Local
Bodies and Rural Development8. Private sector •
IIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Rapid Assessment of Existing Rural Water SUDD I v Schemesin the Northern Areas
1.1. Objective and Scope of Survey
The objective of this survey was to draw a better picture ofthe situation in the water and sanitation sector at the villagelevel, in order to identify and better understand the factorsleading to the success or failure of water supply projects in theNorthern Areas. The survey was conducted over a three-month periodfrom June to August 1989; it involved approximately four weeks inthe field visiting villages. In all, 78 water supply schemes weresurveyed - 58 executed under LB&RD, and 20 by NAPWD.
One researcher was sent to meet numbers of the Vi 11 age ProjectCommittees, Union Council members, villagers, and Governmentemployees working at the sub-division level. In each village,discussions and interviews of the aforementioned persons tookplace. Opinions and views of these people were sought in order toassess the situation. In most villages, an inspection of theinfrastructure (gravity systems) was undertaken. This inspectionwas not highly technical, but was aimed at givinq an observablecontext to the opinions and views expressed. Therefore, thefollowing information should not be regarded as a technicalevaluation of the schemes, but as a good example of the currentsituation at the village level: and as showing the kind of problems.faced in the implementation of water supply and sanitation projectsin the Northern Areas.
Four levels of repair needs have been identified, and arerepresented on a scale between 0 and 3. They are defined asfollows:
0 Scheme is in good working condition, it does not need anvrepair or any major change in its maintenance procedure.
1 The scheme is in good working condition, but needs betteroperation and maintenance procedures, or minor repairs whichwould not incur any costs to the community. For example, thetank needs to be cleaned, the intake pipe needs to be coveredwith a mesh to filter debris, or responsibilities formaintenance need to be fixed.
2 Parts of the scheme (or, in some instances, the whole scheme)are not operational due to a breakdown of one or two of thecomponents of the scheme. The repairs that are needed can bemet at a cost which the community can support, with onlylimited supervision from the government departments. Forexample, most taps need to be replaced, one or few pipes haveburst, the tank needs repairs, or some fitting is needed.
3 The scheme is usually not operational due to maior breakdownsof many components of the system. The repairs needed would
incur costs difficult to bear for the community, and closesupervision from the government departments. For example, acombination of some of the repairs mentioned above, or a tankneeding to be rebuilt entirely, or pipes having been laid notdeep enough necessitating digging them all out andreinstalling them.
1.2. Summary of Findings
The district-wise summary of scheme assessment is given below.This is followed by detailed reports on each of the threedistricts.
Abbreviations: GLTBLNDMR
Level ofRepai r
0123
flLI
31
1011
25
Level ofRepai r
0123
Gil
7322
SUMMARY TABLE
Gilgit DistrictBaltistan DistrictDiamer District
LB&RD Schemes
BLN DMR Total
5 3 115 1 711 1 224 3 18
25 8~ 58
NAPWD Schemes
DMR Total
1 2 101 0 41 0 31 0 3
*
19134031
50201515
District reports for Gilgit, Baltistan and Diamer are qiven
next.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
1.3. Report on Gilait District
Gilgit and Punial Valley
Scheme Status Implementing vi11 ageSystem Population
Naupura LB&RD 1000
Jagir Basseen
Danyore ?
Henzel 1
Guiapur 0
Gich 2
LB&RD
NAPWD
LB&RD
LB&RD
3000?
12000
LB&RD
Singal 1 NAPWD
Bubur Baia 3 LB&RD
Bubur Paeen LB&RD
1300
1000
1100
Sher Qilah 0 NAPWD
Gakuch ? NAPWD
Gupis Valley
Phandar 3 LB&RD
RejnaxJss
Tank not used, itleaks. Piped waterseldom used, too warm.Pipes often laid onthe surface.Under construction,almost completed.Irregular service.+90% covered.Pipes get clogged.Vi1 lagers do repairs.Villagers do smallrepairs. At present35% covered. Missingpipes for 2nd tank.Mai ntenance byvi1 lagers in vicinityof breakdown. 50*covered.
Unprotected source.50% covered. LB&RDscheme to be started.Tank l e a k i n g .Villagers willing torepair if they getmoney. +90% covered.Under construction.Tank completed. Halfthe pipes laid.Villagers installedfund. +90 % coveredat completion.Excellent condition,b u t s e r v i c eintermittent due tosmall tank. 2nd tankwill be built.Smal1 scheme forofficial buildings.
Vi 1 lage scattered overlongdistance, schemes t i l l u n d e rconstruction after 5
Gulagh Mu I i LB&RD
Shamaran
Charmoyan
Gupis
2
3
2
LB&RD
LB&RD
NAPWD
LB&RD
Yasin Valley
Yasin
TausDeretch(Harpo) 0
Shot
NAPWD
NAPWDLB&RD
LB&RD
275
250
Hundur LB&RD
Sandi LB&RD
Gujaiti LB&RD 1000
years. At present onlyvery low coverage.100% cove red. P i pesnot deep enough. Pipedwater not used insummer: too warm.Unprotected source.Tank grows all kindsof things!Pipes burst lastwinter. People happywith system.Tank too smal 1. Burstpipes. 50% covered.Small scheme forofficial buildingsand few houses.Small scheme, onlyfew houses covered.Inappropriate source.
Under construction,still needs somefitting.Under construction.Good system, goodmaintenance. 60%covered.Scheme completed butn o n - o p e r a t i o n a lbecause 1 pipe betweenintake and reservoiris missing. Otherwise,100* covered.S c h e m e newerimplemented. LB&RDdid survey but droppedt h e p r o j e c t .Villagers say theywanted the pipes.S c h e m e newerimplemented, villagersrefused self-helpprinciple. Wanted thescheme free "likePWD". Channel wateris perceived by manyto be "best water".50* covered. Tankleaks. Pipes not laiddeep enough because
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
1111111111111111111
Roshen
Sumal
Ishkomen Valley
Chatorkhan
Pakura
Nominabad Baia 3
Pai zabad
Hunza Valley
Altit
Moaminabad
2
2
3
3
2
2
LB&RD
LB&RD
NAPWD
LB&RD
LB&RD
LB&RD
LB&RD
LB&RD
800
800
1 100
2200
3500
scheme constructedd u n n q w i n t e r .Intermittent service.Maintenance person"not reliable".Not completed vet.When complete 60%covered. Tank has noroof.80* covered. Supplyis low. Blocked pipes:due to some vi I laaers(from a "powerfulf a m i l y 1 ) w h ointentionally divertwater for irrigation.Service of plumber notreliable because heis not paid.
Small scheme forofficial buildings.PVC pipes were used,bursting problems.The scheme ispresent 1y beingextended to the wholev i 11 age.New scheme. lankcompleted but nopipes.Tank completed, pipesreceived "4 years ago"but never installed.Unity problems amongthe vi1 lagers.Abandoned scheme.Diqqinq is tood i f f i c u l t , too muchs t o n e s ,blasting.
n e e d s
Operational , but needsedimentation tankand/or filtrationtank.P r e s e n t l y no toperational, but
Hyderabad 2 LB&RD
Nasi rabad
Khanabad
2 LB&RD 2500
2 LB&RD 900
1.A. Report on Baltistan District
Rondu Valley
DambodasBasho
00
NAPWDLB&RD
180160
Skardu Valley
HottO 2-3 LB&RD
Kumrah
Ghamba
0-1 LB&RD
0-1 NAPWD
Hussainabad 0 NAPWD
Thorgo 1 NAPWD
Thorgo Bala LB&RD 400
usually works. Wateri s too muddy, the tankfills up rapidly.Tank badly buiIt.P r e s e n t l y notoperational. PVC pipeswere installed; somewere later replaced,but sti11 some arepresent. Some of thesepipes are damaged.Operational. Watervery muddy. Nobodyresponsi ble forrepai rs.+90% covered, butvillagers complainabout pipe shortages(only 1100 rft).Plumber feels not paidenough, he has tovolunteer his time.
Successful system.Successful system.
Infrastructure notinspected. Does notwork since 1 year.Infrastructure notinspected. Apparentlyworking wel 1.Infrastructure notinspected. Apparentlyworking wel 1 .Working wel1. 65*covered.Piped water used inwinter, but in summersource is mainly usedfor irrigation. Peopleusing the samechannels.Very low pressure whenworking. Pipes notlaid deep enough. No
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Shi gar Valley
Marapa- 1 NAPWD
Blassan
Shi gar 0-1 NAPWD
1400
Chorka
Hourouchouse
NAPWD
NAPWD 640
Alchori 3 NAPWD 1600
Tsildi-
Kashmai
Sisko
Matulu
3 NAPWD
3 LB&RD
2 LB&RD 550
Zagonda
Khapulu Valley
2-3 LB&RD 800
maintenance system.Taps need to bereplaced. Presentlynot working.
System works we I 1i ntermi ttent Iy.
but
System works we I I butintermittently. Sourcedoes not provideenough water on acontinuous basis.Under constructionsince 1987.
One of the main linepipes crosses a river,and the system has tobe shut down whenriver is high duringthe summer to preventclogging of the pipes.100% covered.90% covered. Waterfrom stream gets verymuddy at some times.Need a sedimentationtank, probablyfi1tration.One source for twovillages; shortage ofwater.
Supposed to be LB&RDscheme here, but nopipes or tank were tobe seen.Large pipes have burstlast winter. Villagersrequested LB&RD fornew pipes. 85%covered.Part of the schemedoes not work.
GowariYougo
0-1 LB&RD2-3 LB&RD 2000
BalgharBarra
Khapulu
02
LB&RDLB&RD
LB&RD
10502000
Surmon
Sal ing
Keris
Goal
0-1
2-3
1
LB&RD
LB&RD
LB&RD
LB&RD
3500
3000
Kharmang Val
Sirmik Gons
MehdiabadGuzbarMehdiabadPanda
Mathoka
ley
2
2
0-1
3
LB&RD
NAPWD
LB&RD
LB&RD
170
175
450
500
System working well.Plumber left thevillage to work inthe armv. Yougo is atypical Balti village;building latrines andinstalling pipes isdifficult because thehouses are denselygrouped. 2 lines outof 6 or 7 are brokendown. Pipes not laiddeep enough, manyrocks. Villagers don o t m a i n t a i nthemselves apart fromvery simple repairswhich can be done withsome rubber bands orsome plastic.Working wel1.Main pipe broken whereit crosses the river.100* covered.Many taps are leaking.Otherwise goodmaintenance. Fourdifferent sources areused.
Infrastructure notinspected. Apparentlyworking we 11.Infrastructure notinspected. 50 %covered?Working wel 1 . Channelwater widely used.Under construction.Should be 100*covered.
Most taps are notworking properly.Lack of maintenance.
Presently broken down.
Infrastructure notvisited. Apparentlyworking wel1.Tank not high enough,
IIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Sando
SerlingGonsPari
IngutGhandus
3
00-10
-2
LB&RD
NAPWDLB&RDNAPWD
NAPWDLB&RD
575
4504501000
600
no pressure. Tankneeds cleaning. Notoperational.Not operational . Tankand intake out oforder. Some taps needto be replaced.Working wel1.Working wel1.Working wel1. 100*covered.Under construction.Not operational . Somepipes burst. Nor e s o u r c e s formaintenance.
The next few schemes are located in an area where mobility is restricted.Information was gathered by interviewing a Union Council member, and somevillagers familiar with the area.
Baghicha
Tarkoti
Hamzigoun
Olding
Moroi
0-1 LB&RD 1550
0-1 LB&RD 750
0-1 NAPWD 450
0-1 NAPWD
2-3 LB&RD
Tchachatang 2-3 LB&RD
Infrastructure notinspected. Apparentlyin operation.Infrastructure notinspected. Apparentlyin operation.Infrastructure noti nspected. Apparent1yin operation.Infrastructure notinspected. Apparentlyin operation.Infrastructure notinspected. Notoperational. Pipeshave burst.Infrastructure noti nspected . Notoperational. Pipeshave burst.
1.5. Report on Diamer District
Chi las
GaisPaeen 3 LB&RD
Gais Bala 2 LB&RD
Pro.ject dropped afterinstallation of fewpipes, villagers didnot feel the need forit anymore.Not operational. Pipes
Ginni LB&RD
Darrel Valley
Palati 3 LB&RD
GayelPhuguchGumari
1-1
LB&RDLB&RDLB&RD
15008003000
Tangir Valley
DiamerJagloteGali PaeenGali BalaChumari 0
Darkali Bala 0-1
Mushki 0
Khai BatogahS
NAPWDNAPWDNAPWDNAPWDNAPWD
LB&RD
NAPWD
LB&RD
800090008009002400
1500
3500
Darang
burst, villagers noti n t e r e s t e d inrepairing them.S t i l l u n d e rc o n s t r u c t i o n .Villagers migrate tohigher val leys duringthe summer. Makesconstruction verys l o w . P i p e sinadequately stored.Those pipes that areal ready instal led werenot laid deep enough.
Total of 20 taps inthis village but al1of them have beeninstalled at themosque, for ablutions.Not a single communaltap or houseconnection. Women donot seem to fetchwater at the mosque,they use channelwater.Operational.Under construction.Operational.
Under construction.Under construction.Under construction.Under construction.In operation, workingwel 1.Infrastructure noti nspected. Apparent1yworking wel1.Operational, workingwell.Badly maintainedscheme. Half the tapsout of order. One oftwo lines clogged.
IIIIIIIIIIIIII1IIII
III
Goharabad 0-1 LB&RD 450 O p e r a t i o n a l . Working
w e l l .
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 1
Bxisting NAPVD Scheeiea
1
Districti
i
i - - - - - - - - - -
Gilgit
Baltiitu
[Diaier
1
!Total
Siall Village
No. ofVillagesCovered
3
4
7
Populati-on Cover-ed
875
1061
1936
X ofPopulat-ion
2
4
1
2
4
7
Nediui Village
No. ofVillagesCovered
12
7
2
21
Populati-on Cover-ed
10000
5312
1875
17187
X ofPopulat-ion
6
4
2
7
5
4
5
Large Village
No. ofVillagesCovered
3
11
2
16
Populati-on Cover-ed
13125
36925
3438
53488
X ofPopulat-ion
18
30.2
13.7
24.3
No. ofVillagesCovered
18
22
4
44
Total
Populati-on Cover-ed
2400O
43298
5313
72611
X ofPopulat-ion !
9.2
16.3
3.5
10.7
Source: Office of the Chief Engineer MAPVD, Northern Areas.
Table 2
Existing LBtRDD Scheies of District Councils
I Districti
ii
i - - - - - - - - - -i
digit
IBaltistan
! Diaier
!Total
Siall Village
No. ofVillagesCovered
1
1
1
3
Populati-on Cover-ed
210
168
193
571
X ofPopulat-ion
0
0
0
0
.5
.7
.4
.5
Nediui Village
No. ofVillagesCovered
11
10
4
22
Populati-on Cover-ed
7290
5832
3307
16429
X of"Populat-ion
4.9
4.9
4.3
4.7
Large Village
No. of Popuiati- X ofVillages on Cover- Popuiat-Covered ed ion
ii
:NO. of{Villages[Covered
i
I 12
!• 1 1
! 6
! 28
Total
Populati-on Cover-ed
750U
6000
3500
1700
X ofPopulat-ion
2.8
2.3
2.3
2.5
Source: LBfcRD Northern Areas.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 3
Existing LBIKDD Scieiei of Commit? Buic Servicet
i District
Gilgit
IBaltistan
!Diaier
[Total
Siall Village
Ho. ofVillagesCovered
8
20
8
34
Populati-on Cover-ed
2741
5603
1878
10222
X ofPopulat-ion
......
623
3
9
,9
.2
.8
.1
Hediui Village
Ho, ofVillagesCovered
Jt
26
18
81
Populati-on Cover-ed
28101
18140
12957
$9204
X ofPopulat-ion
18.9
15.2
16.9
17.2
Large Village
No. ofVillagesCovered
7
3
10
Populati-on Cover-ed
15412
(988
22400
X ofPopulat-ion
21
5.7
10.2
No. ofVillagesCovered
52
4$
24
.........125
Total
Populati-on Cover-ed
46260
30731
14836
91826
x of :Populat-!ion !
17
11
9
13
.7 !
.6 !
.8 !
. $ :
Source: Couunitv Basic Services Program 1987 Annual Progress Report.
Table 4
Northern Areas Council Hater Supply Scaeies (Planned)
j Districtiiti
i
Gilgit
iBaltistanii
|Diaier
Total
Stall Village
Mo. ofVillagesCovered
1
4
6
11
Populati-on Cover-ed
320
1337
1874
3531
X ofPopulat-ion
0.8
5.5
3.8
3.1
Hediui Village
Ho. ofVillagesCovered
6
5
7
18
Populati-on Cover-ed
7531
4957
6848
19336
X ofPopulat-ion
5.1
4.2
8.9
5.6
Large Village
No, ofVillagesCovered
3
3
1
7
Populati-on Cover-ed
6649
9598
4001
20248
X ofPopulat-ion
9.1
7.9
16
9.2
No. ofVillagesCovered
10
12
14
36
Total
Populati-on Cover-ed
14500
15892
12723
43115
x of !Populat-Iion i
5
8
6
6 I6 !
4 I
4 i
Source: Planning and Development Department, Northern Areas.
Table 5
UNICEP Assisted Hater Supply Scheies (Planned)
1
! Districti
i
Gilgit
Baltistan
| Diaier
:Total
Siall Village
No. ofVillagesCovered
3
4
2
9
Populati-on Cover-ed
359
1779
579
2717
X ofPopulat-ion
0.9
7.4
1.2•
2.4
Nediui Village
No. ofVillagesCovered
8
n
ao
23
Populati-on Cover-ed
8395
7294
5565
21254
X ofPopulat-ion
5.7
6.1
7.2
6.2
Large Village
Ho. ofVillagesCovered
1
1
Popuiati- X ofon Cover- Populat-ed ion
2400 2
2400 1.1
No. ofVillagesCovered
11
12
10
33
Total
Populati-on Cover-ed
8754
11473
6144
26371
x of :Populat-Iion !
3
4
4
3
3 !
3 !
i :
9 !
Source: Research Director, tfoien Development Project, UNICEP, Northern Areas.
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 6COST ANALYSIS OF RURAL HATER SUPPLY SCHEMES
PUBLIC TORIS DEPARTMENTS
1 11 1
18/Ko. !lue of Scheiei i
)......-..<-...........
11. ISAUAR| 2 . IDAITORB\i, [JA6L0TK| 4 . i S I M B R| S . | S I E H QILLA| 6 . ISIMAL| T . IL/8AI0CI| 8 . |G/8AIUCI19. ICIATOI HANDi 1 0 . I8UPIS111 . iTAJIK| 1 2 . ITAUSB| 1 3 . |SIA»BIAIAD HA6KR114. {TBOLB IAGBIMS. I80UIT IUIZA111. HASH PtOPBR; IT. IGAIISI 1UHASIS. ISIISAIi i
| 1 9 . 1SILDI SHfiBR| 2 t . iALCIOII '111. iSIIGU 2| 2 2 . iTBOYAR123. IIOSSAIHABAD\U. IOAI1A|2S. IIUDIABAD126. IUAPDU)! 2 t . ICKWAR128. JURIS|29 . imiLRT| 3 0 . jTOLTOBOROQ i131. IPARRI || 3 2 . iPION !| 3 1 . ISIART i| 3 4 . IIATI81A i| 3 5 . I.DAPO !| 3 6 . IIAHZIGOID UARMONG!|3T. iOLDIIG !!38. icy OKA ;| 39 . iCBATPA !|40 . IDAREL/TANGIR \| 4 1 . IASTORE !| 4 2 . IBUMJI !| 4 3 . IGORIIOTK !
[TOTAL J !
! D i s t r i c t
IGILGITi a
I •
l •
iGHBZBRi •
i •
i •
i •
i *
I *
i •
! GILOIT1 I
i i
i * '
•
BALTISTAISIARDU
•
•
V
•
•
•
•
•
• |
• I
« 1
• 1
1 |
DIAMIR !• 1
• |
iNo. of| Taaki
! lI lI l! l! 1
•
1l1 !
1 i1 !l !1 j1 ;
| Storage! Capacity! i t Gin
! 62000j 325001 62300I 500i 2000! 2000I 1000I 1000i 1000i 1000! IOOOi 1000[ 500001 10000i 200001 20000
150008000
45000500005000065000600006000030000
100000300004000050000
600 !16000 !16000 i16000 i
600 !600 !
2400 !60000 i46200 i10000 !
150000 !80000 !74000 !40000 !
! Population! nerved
i 2000i 15000i 3000! 1000! 2000I 1000i 1500i 1400i 1000i 1300i 1500! 1300! 500i 400! 1000
1000500
5000
800100050003000250025008000
15000 '150050007000 !1000 !2000 i3000 !1500 i500 !500 i300 !7 0 0 :
3080 !397 i
3000 12500 !2000 !1000 i
113177 !
! Per Capita! Cost! IRs)
i 850.00! 240.00! 551.00! 0i 424.001 605.00! 403.00: 432.00j 800.00i 85.38! 74.00I 85.38i 1600.00
500.00750.00957.00470.00412.00
1250.00294.00294.00700.00400.00640.00234.38166.67533.33206.00160.00300.00 ,150.0(1 !83.33 i
466.67 i600.00 1600.00 !
1666.67 !2807.14 !1298.70 !1435.77 !
342.67 !936.80 !923.50 !
1208.00 1
! Capital Cost!S in Mil l ion |: IRSI ;
! 1.700 Ii 3.600 i! 1.653 |! 0 !! 0.848 i! 0.605 i! 0.605 !! 0.605 !i 0.80 !! 0.111 {
! o . m :! 0.111 !! 0.800 !: 0.200 i! 0.750 j
0.957 !0.235 i2.060 1
1.000 i1.300 !1.470 i2.100 !1.000 !1.600 !1.875 !2.500 !0.800 i1.030 !1.12b !0.300 !0.300 •0.250 !(1.700 |0.300 1o.3oo ;0.500 !1.900 !4.000 i0.570 !1.028 !2.342 !1.847 I1.208 i
47.091 !
SOURCE: lead Office MaPVD GILGIT
ITable 7 . -
COST ANALYSIS OF COMPLETED RURAL WATER SUPPLY SCHEMES IN NORTHERN AREASLocal Bodies and Rural De?elopient •
(Figure is Pak Rupee) ••
Ser No. Nate of scheie Population Costs Cost per capitabenefited --
Govt Con. UMICKF Total Gort Con UIICBP Total •
1. RVS Scheie Thole Nagar 791 20000 30000 66000 116000 26.28 37.93 S3.43 146.64Gilgit |
2. RVS Scheie Ihanabad 1000 34000 50000 12T000 211000 34.00 S0.00 12T.0O 211.00H u m Gilgit ••
3. RVS Scheie Ghuliitdas 2000 30000 60000 224000 314000 15.00 30.00 112.00 157.00 ™Ntgar Gilgit
4. RVS Scheie Niacher Nagar 2300 47000 81000 242000 370000 20,43 35.22 105.22 160.86 IGilgit
5. RVS Scheie fekir Nagar 3241 60000 85000 285000 430000 18.51 26.22 87.93 132.67 |Gilgit
6. RVS Scheie Hassanabad 700 36200 63200 146700 246100 51.71 90.28 209.57 351.56 IHunea Gilgit
7. RVS Scheie Passu H u m 600 20000 30000 81000 131000 33.33 50.00 135.00 218.33 •Gilgit •
8. RVS Scheie Narkhoofi Huosa 900 31000 55000 115700 201700 34.44 61.11 lit.ii 224.1 •Gilgit |
9. RVS Scheie Soust H u m 610 30000 63300 156600 249900 49.18 103.77 2(6.72 409.67 _Gilgit I
10. RVS Scheie Thorgo 430 20000 25000 6S000 110000 15.00 30.00 112.00 157.00Baltistan •
11. RVS Scheie Tarkati 565 19000 23000 38400 80400 33.62 40.70 67.96 142.28Ihariang Baltistao •
12. RVS Scheie Yugo Ihaplu 800 22800 33400 72000 128200 28.50 41.75 90.00 160.25Baltiitan -
13. RVS Scheie Vanrpur Shigar 500 24200 41200 90600 156000 48.40 82.40 181.20 312.00 IBaltiitan
TOTAL 14437 394200 640100 1710000 2744300 |
AVESA6S COST PSft CAPITA 31.33 52.26 130.5 214.09
I
III
Table 8
Private Sector
II
! CATWOEY
I EeUilor
1Contractor 1
!Contractor 2
! Consultant
||1
1
Urtiiaa 1
!Artisan 2
Artiian 3 !
i • i
! mimic
! Nil
! taring Work
Private
Tes
Tei
Ii
On Job Train!ing
On Job Traiaii M !
I LABOR AVAILABLE!(Skilled/Unskilled)! Associates
! Tes
!es
Tes
Tes
•
Tes
Tes
Tes !
1 INPUTS iGOODS/SERVICESj AVAILABLE | OFFEREDi i
i i
i i
! Tes iGI,CI,PVC Pipe! iand Sanitary! ifittings
! Tes jlnstalation,! JRepairs, Const1 Jruction of Bui! {lding, Roads t! {Bridges
Tes iNetf Instalat-lion of Hater!Supply and{Civil works
1I
Tes jArchetecturalit Engineering{Civil A Elect.i
\
Tes {New as well as{Repairsiiiii
Tes {New as veil as{Repairsi
i ii t
i i
Tes IMasonary Ser- '{vices ji i
{ CREDIT
! Mot Using
Will not use{Credit
Needs Credit
Needs Credit
Needs Credit
Needs Credit
Needs Credit!
{SALE OF GOODS{AND SERVICES
! Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing
Increasing !
{ CLIENT ! EXPANSION{ { PLAN {i i ii i i
i i ii i i» i i
!House Hold {Subject to jSConsuiers {Harket Deiand!i i ii * i
i i " " i
i i
NAPVD {Planning to I{Bxpand Biisti]
1 {sting Busine-!: {ss. ;• i i• i i
i i
NAPVD/NES {Planning to !{Expand Existi!{sting Busine-!{SB. :i ii ii >
Individuals {Planning to {{Expand Existi!{sting Busine-!{SB. {1 1
1 11 1
Contractor {Planning to {and Individ-{Expand Existi!uals {sting Busine-!
iss. !i ii i
Contractor !Planning to {and Individ-{Expand Existi{uals {sting Busine-J
{ss. {i i• i
Contractor {Trying to be-jand Individ-!cose a cont- !uals {ractor. !
Source: Private Sector Survey, Conducted by Research Director, Voien's Development Project, UNICBF, April 1989, Northern Areas
4. Summary and Conclusions
4.1. Sustainabi1ity Analysis4.2. Synthesis of Effective Development Principles
IIII
Annex 4 1
A Case Study of the Community Basic Services Program IExcerpted from report of the same title by Maliha H. Hussein, submitted tothe InternatioLumpur, 1988.the International Council for the Management of Population (ICOMP), Kuala I
U
I1. Background Informations2. Assessment of the CBS Program
2.1. The Program Objectives •2.2. The Program Strategy |2.3. The Delivery System2.4. The Process of Community Participation2.5. The Monitoring & Evaluation system •2.6. The Role of Participating Agencies •
3. Progress and Impact Assessment •
3.1. Water Supply Schemes3.2. Sanitation Projects m3.3. Traditional Birth Attendant Training •3.4. Vocational Skill Training3.5. Community Health & Nutrition Workers
IIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
1. Background Information
This case study of the Community Basic Services Proqram (CBS)is intended to hiqhlight the role of the community in the desiqn,identification and implementation of a paokaqe of social sectoractivities. The basic research objective is to extract from theexperience of the CBS Proqram effective development principleswhich will enable development planners to improve the level ofcommunity participation in health and population proarams.
2. Assessment of the CBS Program
2.1. The Program ,CJpjecLt,ives
The Community Basic Services Proqram comprised of a packageof basic health, sanitation and income generating services for thethree districts of Gilgit, Baitistan and Diamer. I he basicobjective of the Proqram was improvement in the health, sanitationand economic status of women and children. More specifically, theProgram aimed at reducing infant and maternal mortality andmorbidity caused by communicable diseases, reducinq mainutrition.increasing the enrolment of children in schools and increasingwomen's participation in rural development activities.
In the project documents the Program objectives were listedas follows:
o To assist the local community organizations (formal andinformal) in the organization of planninq, implementation andmanagement of basic services based on their felt needs andlocal resources.
o To train Sectoral Department officials and other start: thec o m m u n i t y o f f i c i a l s , e l e c t e d c o u n c i l o r s , m a n a g e r s , v i l l a g eproject committees and vi I laqe sectoral sub-committee membersin the field management of proiect activities related to thefelt needs of the local communities in 150 villages.
o To provide services for primary health care, sanitation,hygiene and literacy to women and children through theorganization of Village Project Committees.
o To upgrade local skills throuqh traininq and education orcommunity workers.
o To help increase both directly and indirectly the income ofthe poorest families through skill training of women andthrough village learning groups participating in non-formaleducation.
o To provide potable water supply to 150 villages in the proiectarea by the end of the project period.
1
2
II
The strategic objectives of the Community Basic ServicesProgram were described as follows: I
o To reduce the infant and child mortality and morbidity due tocommunicable diseases, infantile diarrhoea, dysentery and •related infections from the present level of 27.3% to 23* in Ithe target areas.
o To reduce the prevalence of protein-calorie malnutrition in Iinfants and children (0-5 years age group) from the present •level of 24.17* to 20% in the target areas
o To reduce maternal mortality from 6.8 per thousand live births |to 6 per thousand in the target areas.
o To increase enrolment of 5-9 age group for boys from 21* to I35%, and for girls from 10% to 25% in the target areas. ™
o To increase rural women's participation in income generating •activities from 25% to 40% in the target areas. •
2.2. The Program Strategy •
The main factors responsible for infant and child mortality,morbidity and malnutrition were attributed to the scarcity of _potable water, unhygienic living conditions, lack of training of Imothers about proper child care, food requirements and personal •hygiene, absence of referral health facilities, poor nutritionalintake, low levels of income and illiteracy. These problems were •seen as inter-related and requiring not /just provision of basic |health and sanitation infrastructure but a program of activitieswhich aimed at behavioral changes. m
The Program targets were given as follows:
o The construction of 150 water supply schemes and 150 Idemonstration water drainage systems. •
o The construction of 300 demonstration latrines and •encouragement to construct individual household garbage |disposal pits and a minimum of five latrines in privatehouseholds in each village and to encourage the construction _of three bio-gas plants by the community in each district. I
o The training of 150 village plumber-cum-sanitary workers formaintenance of the water supply schemes and the sanitation Ifacilities. •
o The training of 150 Traditional Birth Attendants. •
o The training of 150 Community Health and Nutrition Workers.
II
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
o To impart vocational skills training to 150 women,
o The establishment of 150 Community Women's Centers.
o To impart refresher courses to primary school teachers andmid-level health personnel.
o To provide immunization to 90% of the 0-5 population in theselected 150 villages.
o To establish a system for effective distribution and use orOral Rehydration Salts (ORS).
o To train 600 Village Pro.iect Committee members in programmanagement techniques through community participation.
The entry point used was a drinking water supply scheme, onthe assumption that a major cause of mortality and morbidity inthe project area was due to water borne diseases. The package wasput together after a comprehensive survey of felt needs in a randomsample of villages in the project area.
The program planners felt that the results of the surveyindicated that the community attached sufficient priority to theavailability of drinking water to allow them to make theavailability of the water contingent on acceptance of othercomponents of health and sanitation which might not be thatpopular. As such, the basic package of services includedcomponents which, in the survey, had not been identified aspriority needs by the community but which in the view of theprogram planners warranted inclusion due to the impact they wouldhave on the target population.
The delivery, implementation and monitoring of this packaqeof services was to be achieved by using a three-pronged strategy;existing government infrastructure supplemented by specialist t ieiastaff was to be used for the delivery of the packages. Theimplementation of the various packages was to be conducted underthe supervision of the Union Councils with the involvement or thecommunity through the Village Pro.iect Committees ( VPC > which werespecially established for the purpose. Initially, Village ProjectCommittees were entrusted with sending pro.iect implementationreports but this system was replaced by the establishment of aMonitoring & Evaluation Unit in 1984. This M&E Unit was to recordprogress and coordinate program implementation and review with theline departments of the Government and the donor agencies.
The program was to run for five years and was expected tocover 150 villages in three districts. The different packages wereto be implemented in three phases with each phase covering 50villages. Including the preparation period, the Program was to run
II
from January 1981 to the end of 1986. The selection of villages _was made by the respective district councils in consultation with Ithe CBS unit. In some cases, this decision was inspired more by •political considerations than by those of need. However, the mainpoint about the selection procedure was the assumption that all the •selected villages had identical health and sanitation profiles and |needs and would respond to the different CBS packages in the samemanner. «
The village plans of action which listed the targets for eachphase were not prepared in consultation with the community but werereviewed first at the Markaz and District level and then at the Iregional level by the CBS Unit, and then consolidated into the CBS IProgram Plan of Action. The absence of community participation inthe preparation of the village plans was a serious oversight in a •program which relied heavily on the notion of self-help to |encourage the community to participate in the implementation of theprogram. _
The Program targets were of two kinds: those that were *expected to provide a direct service to the community and thosethat were to be provided for demonstration purposes. A review of •the targets reveals that the Program planners relied heavily on |the demonstration effect for the achievement of program targets.However, the program did not put in place mechanisms that would •have enabled the people to have access to a facility after its |demonstration had proved its usefulness. The program did not fullycomprehend that poverty was the principal reason for poor accessto adequate sanitation, drainage and nutrition status. Behavioral Ichanges were expected without putting into place incentives which •would reinforce the desired behavior.
There was heavy emphasis on training village level workers in |the list of targets. In the three phases of the Program, therewere plans to train at least 1,200 village level workers in various _tasks. An important question which was left unanswered was how Ithese people were to be motivated in the performance of their tasks •after their training. The question of remuneration was notdiscussed on the assumption that these people would be willing to •volunteer their time for the good of the community. There was no Iutilization strategy worked out between the project and the usersof the services which these trainees would provide. •
The Program strategy was clearly premised on communityparticipation but there was very little understanding of how thiswas to be achieved. To begin with, there was very little or no •involvement of the target population. The Village Project •Committee (VPC), the main implementing agency of the Program atthe village level, consisted of four or five members who did not •or could not always consult the other villagers on aspects of the |Program. As a result, a majority of the villagers were unaware ofits workings or the exact nature of its responsibilities. The VPC »
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
needed the support and active collaboration of the villagers forthe implementation of the CBS program. The mechanisms which wouldensure accountability of the VPC to the village were also veryweak.
Z•3. The Delivery System
The main body responsible for the planninq, implementationand monitoring of the CBS Program was the CBS Unit. The chief ofthis body was the Deputy Director of the Local Bodies & RuralDevelopment (LB&RD) Department. The Unit had four deputy chiefs.These were the Planning Officer of the Planning and DevelopmentCell, one representative each from the Health and EducationDepartments of the Government, and the Assistant Director otvocational training project. In addition, the Unit had tourmembers: a coordinator who was the representative from the Aqa KhanFoundation, and the three chairmen of the District Councils.
The Additional Commissioner of the Planning and Development-Cell was designated the Project Director and the Chief Coordinatorof the Program. At the District level, the District Councils weremade responsible for planning, implementation and review of theprogram components with the assistance of the respective AssistantDirectors from the LB&RD Departments in the Districts. In theMarkaz, the Project Managers and their staff were assigned theduties of coordination and facilitation. At the Union Councillevel, each Union Council member was designated Chairman of theVillage Project Committees in his ward, with responsibility forplanning, execution and maintenance of projects.
All the equipment, materials and inputs received from UNICEFwere delivered directly by the CBS Unit in the Gilgit District.The delivery of inputs for the Baltistan and Diamer Districts wascoordinated through the Assistant Directors of the LB&RDDepartment. The Project Managers were not involved in the deliveryor management of the inputs supplied to the villages in the threedistricts.
The training programs for local leaders, health workers,Traditional Birth Attendants and vocational skills trainers wereplanned, designed and conducted by the CBS Unit with the technicalassistance of the line departments. The training programs forteachers were conducted by the Aga Khan Education Services, andthey selected teachers from CBS villages in their regular courses.
At the village level, Village Project Committees (VPCs; wereformed. Sectoral sub-committees were formed under these VPCs toimplement, supervise and maintain different components of the CBSprogram. The VPCs consisted of a president who was the member ofthe Union Council of" the ward. The other office bearers of theVPC included a vice-president, a secretary and a joint secretary.The membership of the sectoral sub-committees was decided by the
II
V I ^K *m* > ^ ^ V T ^ 4 ^ ^ bf | ^ ^ ^ " * ^ %K 1 I 1 ^ u ^^1 I I I I 1^4 1 9 I V ^ W * ^ ^J ^rf I ^ * * *w* W ^4 ^ ^ I t 1^4 I I T • • l ^ t f l l l 1 ^ ^ ^ T ^ ^ l i t 4
sub-committee as it thought were required for a particular purpose. MCommittee membership was guided by the simple rule that no person I
I
VPCs. It was up to the community to select as many members in asub-committee as it thought were required for a particular purpose.Committee membership was guided by the simple rule that no personfrom the same household could be nominated to more than onecommi ttee.
The VPCs were required to follow a series of rules andregulations. These are summarized below:
o The VPC was required to maintain contact with the Union |Council, the District Council and other concerned departments.It was required to extend its full technical and _administrative cooperation in the implementation of project Iactivities. •
o The VPC was required to plan and implement the CBS program •with the participation of the local population and the |cooperation of the concerned Union Council.
o The VPC was required to arrange administrative matters Iregarding the implementation of the project at the locallevel.
The VPC was responsible for the financial management of theprogram at the field level.
Io The VPC was responsible for the supervision and monitoring ofthe project activities of the sectoral sub-committees,assessment of their performance, and keepinq a check on —financial matters. I
o The VPC was required to submit reports to the Union Council,Markaz and the District Council members. I
o The VPC was required to nominate community workers such asthe Traditional Birth Attendants, the Community Health and BNutrition Workers, sanitary workers and vocational skills Itrainers in consultation with the representatives of •Government Departments and the community itself.
o The VPC was required to decide about service charges in Iconsultation with the community.
The sectoral sub-committees had a more specific set of |responsibilities. They were required to advise on the design andsite selection for water supply schemes and other construction _work; to help in the motivation of the community for participation •in the implementation of project activities, specifically, women's •participation; to help in the selection of trainees; to mobilizecommunity contribution in terms of cash, land and labor; to monitor •progress of the project activities and report these to the VPCs. |
II
The Union Councils were given the responsibility ofimplementation and execution of program activities through theVPCs.
2.4. The Process of Community Participation
The Community Basic Services Program, as its name suggests,was very clear that it wanted to involve the community in thedesign, implementation and monitoring of the Program. However, itwas not very clear on how to secure such participation or theprecise purpose of such participation. None of the CBS documentsclearly indicates what was to be achieved by the involvement ofthe community. The motives for the involvement of the communityhave to be assumed from the stated objectives of the Program. -
It seems that the Program planners felt that the involvementof the community was beneficial for the following reasons:
o The Program was designed to benefit the community and. assuch, it was natural for the community to be involved in itsidentification, design and implementation.
o The involvement of the community would help to achieve thetargets of the Program in a cost effective manner and wouldalso help to generate resources (labor, land and localmaterials) which the community could provide.
o The involvement of the community would help in the broaderand more long term objective of developing local village levelcapacity to participate in the development of the village.
Although, these objectives are not explicitly stated in theproject documents they are evident from the manner in which thestrategic program documents are phrased. However, there was verylittle done to systematically involve the community in a sustainedmanner. The espoused objectives of community participation couldnot be met through the Village Project Committees which was a verysmall body unable to generate the interest of the village. TheVPCs had failed to mobilize the village population in theachievement of its tasks.
The level of community participation was different at variousstages of the Program. In the identification phase, theparticipation of the community was invited through a comprehensivesurvey of felt needs. Once this survey was translated into apackage of services, technical considerations weighed more heavilythan the priorities of the villages. A standard package ofservices was designed for all the 150 villages selected. Thevillages were not allowed to pick and choose components from thepackage in accordance with their health status or needs.Similarly, the villagers were not given a choice in the selectionof villages for the CBS Program and the selection for inclusion in
II
the Program was made by the District Councils. These factors hada negative effect on the achievement of Program targets. •
A major drawback of the CBS Program was its failure to involvethe target population. Women were to be the main beneficiaries of •the Program. However, there was no effort to involve the women in Ithe planning or implementation stage. The participation of thewomen was restricted to those packages which required womentrainees, e.g., the Traditional Birth Attendant package and the •vocational skills training program. The nature of the CBS packages •was such that women would have taken greater interest than men inthe implementation of the program, as it would have helped reduce •their workload and provide them direct access to other basic |services.
2.5. The Monitoring & Evaluation System I
A system of monitoring had been built into the system devisedby the planners. The sectoral sub-committees were to report on Iprogress, problems and solutions to the VPCs. The VPCs, in turn, Iwere made responsible for consolidating the information on aprescribed pro forma and sending copies to the Union Council, •District Council and the Planning and Development Cell. The system Iof reporting was to be a two-way flow, with the CBS Unit membersand other staff reporting about Program policies, changes and _follow up action to the VPCs. I
At the District level, the District Councils were reviewingthe Program implementation in their districts every quarter. The •CBS Unit was also made responsible to review program implementation |and take decisions to change strategies and recommend policymatters to the Program Review Committee consisting of mrepresentatives of the Government, UNICEF and AKF in their periodic Imeetings. *
The initial system of monitoring which relied heavily on the Isubmission of periodic progress reports from the VPCs was severely Ihandicapped due to the delay in submitting these reports and thefailure of the concerned staff members to take prompt follow up •action. Due to the persistent delay in the achievement of the |targets, a Monitoring and Evaluation Unit was established in 1984.This Unit was given wide ranging responsibility for monitoring and —coordinating follow up action. The M&E officers were expected to Iundertake extensive field visits and report first hand on the •progress on various packages. A quarterly progress report was alsoprepared by this Unit. I
2.6. The Role of Participating Agencies
There were four major participants in the CBS Program: The |Government, the Aga Khan Foundation, UNICEF and the community.Between them, these four entities shared the responsibility for
8
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
financing the Program and for its execution.
The Government bore the major responsibility and was in chargeof logistical support and managerial salaries. UNICEF providedequipment and materials for several of the components and alsoarranged for expertise in various fields when required. A majorcontribution of UNICEF was PVC pipes for the water supply schemes.The Aga Khan Foundation provided funds for TBA training, equipmentfor Community Women's Centers and personnel for the M&E Unit. Thecommunity was expected to provide free labor, land, local materialsand trainees for the various components of the program. Thecommunity was also expected to provide the skills for themanagement and maintenance of village level projects.
The community was to be the major participant in the Program.Not only was the Program designed for the community, but thecontribution expected from the community was also the greatest.Despite the extent of its expected community involvement,communication between the villagers and the program planners wasminimal. There was no mechanism through which the representativesof the community could regularly meet the implementers of theProgram. Contact between the VPCs and the community was alsorestricted or non-existent. The VPC could, on occasion, enlist thesupport of a majority of the village for a large project such asthe water supply scheme. This support was not forthcoming for theother components of the Program. The VPC felt it expedient tobypass the community on a number of issues. In particular, it wasfelt that detailed discussions with the community might hinder theimplementation of such components as the TBA training or vocationaltraining, where the community was asked to select a person fortraining in Gilgit.
3. Progress and Impact Assessment
3.1. Water Supply Schemes
These schemes were the entry point of the CBS Program. Themain purpose behind providing these schemes was to furnish thevillages with a clean source of drinking water. The comprehensivesurvey on the basis of which Program targets were formulated,revealed that the prime cause of infant mortality and morbidity waswater borne diseases. Water supply schemes became popular becauseof the ease of collection of clean water. By the end of 1987, itwas reported that water supply schemes had been completed in 130of the projected 150 villages. This figure is misleading for tworeasons: (i) in most villages maintenance problems have hinderedthe functioning of the schemes; and (ii) the schemes have madedrinking water available to only a small section of the villagepopulation.
There was a delay in the implementation of most of theseschemes due to two main reasons: delay in the supply of materials,
9
Iand delay in implementation by the community. Where the delay wascaused by the failure of the community to act promptly, the reason mwas that the scheme was projected to benefit only a certain section Iof the population and it was difficult to enlist the support ofthose not directly benefitting by the scheme. The most severedrawback in this package has been the failure of the community to 1maintain the schemes in working order. The CBS Program made Iprovisions for the training of a village sanitary-cum-plumberspecialist but the inability of the Program to specify the terms •of remuneration of the specialist made him a reluctant worker. The |community also shied away from accepting any responsibility forpayment to him, expecting that this might persuade the Program .planners to accept the responsibility. I
3.2. Sanitation Projects
This component consisted of the construction of demonstration Ilatrines at several places in the village, provision of householdlatrine equipment to five influential community members and •providing them technical guidance through trained field staff, and Itraining a village sanitary promoter in order to help bring changesin the behavior of communities through education, motivation and _installation of some basic facilities around the community taps. IA sectoral sub-committee was seen as the main motivator for •achieving certain behavioral changes in the villages.
In practice, the sectoral sub-committees remained dormant. |The maintenance of demonstration latrines was not carried out inmost of the cases. The latrines were either reserved for guests _visiting public places or left unattended. In case of household Ilatrines, the situation has been better, but here again the "latrines were primarily reserved for visitors.
The village plumber-cum-sanitary worker was responsible for •maintaining the water supply projects and motivating the communityto adopt flush-type latrines. In return for these services, the •community was to make him a payment. The funds for this payment and |for expenses on repairs and maintenance of water supply schemes andthe demonstration latrines were to be raised by the community _cooperatively and put in a development fund. This fund was not Iraised in a single case. Village plumbers were not paid for their •services, nor were funds arranged for maintenance and repair.
The implementation of this component highlights the importance Iof securing agreement on some basic issues by the community.
3.3. Traditional Birth Attendant Training I
The objective behind the training of a Traditional BirthAttendant (TBA) was to reduce the maternal mortality rate by Iproviding the services of a trained TBA at the village level. The Iresponsibilities of a TBA were to advise health improvement
10 II
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
measures to pregnant mothers through regular home visits, provideassistance in home deliveries and post natal care, and refer thehigh risk cases to the nearest health facilities.
The skills imparted to the TBAs are generally considered ofa high quality. The main drawback in this scheme was in theselection of women for TBA training, conflicts with the establishedTBA in the village, competition offered by health referralfacilities in the vicinity, and fixing of the remuneration for theTBA. These problems could have been avoided by discussing theseissues with the community.
The establishment of a revolving fund to enable the TBAs tosupply medicines to the community did not work well. There was nosystematic monitoring of the performance of the TBAs. A few visitswere undertaken by the M&E Unit and the AKF Coordinator. TheDeputy Chief of the Health Department was supposed to undertaketours to monitor the functioning of the TBAs but he was not madeavailable by the Health Department. The problems identified couldnot be adequately addressed. The most crippling problem in theachievement of this target was the reluctance of villagers to sendwomen for TBA training. This problem was partially resolved byinviting participation of TBA trainees from non-CBS villages.
3.4. Vocational Skill Training
Under this package, equipment, material and financialassistance was to be provided to selected master trainers with theidea that they would sustain themselves after one year by makinghandicrafts and marketing them. The VPCs were expected to nominatetrainees for the Master Trainers course. The VPCs were alsoentrusted with providing assistance in establishing CommunityWomen's Centers (CWCs), at a central point in the village wherevillage women could congregate. These Centers were meant toprovide the village women an income generating opportunity. Amaster trainer was to be in charge of each Center and was expectedto motivate the village women to participate in its activities.The women were to be given adequate training by the master trainerand then assisted in arranging the supply of raw materials and inmarketing its produce. The Centers were also envisaged as traininginstitutions where village women would be given basic training inhealth and hygiene matters.
Under this package, 79 women were trained as master trainers.Interviews with some of the women revealed that the subjects whichthey were being taught did not fit in with the traditional skillsthat they had been taught. For instance, carpet weaving was oneof the topics that women were being taught, although traditionallyit is the men who weave carpets.
In practice, the establishment of these Centers proved to bea problem due to the reluctance of the community to provide
11
Ipremises for the purpose. The master trainer's house was used asa Center in a majority of the villages. These Centers showed some uactivity in the first twelve months when the master trainer was Ipaid an honorarium. After this period, there was very little •activity reported in the Centers. The village women were reluctantto work on the Centers and it is reported that in most cases the ICenters were not able to encourage any trainee to participate in |its activities.
The links of these Centers with markets remained weak. The Isupply of raw materials and the sale of the finished productsremained a major problem. The CWCs needed proper linkages withestablished marketing outlets and these were not provided. As a Iresult the finished products would remain unsold at the Centers. BPartly to look into these problems a female coordinator -wasappointed in 1985. Two marketing officers were also appointed to •investigate these problems. After a year and a half, the posts of |these marketing officers were dispensed with because UNICEF did notwant to finance these posts and the Government was not willing to _provide funds for the purpose either. I
3.5. Community Health & Nutrition Workers IThe objective of this training was to provide the village a
capacity to monitor the growth of infants and children and to keep •a record of their nutritional and health profiles. Detailed growth Imonitoring charts were prepared for the purpose and these recordswere to be periodically filled in by the CH&NW. The Community _health worker was also entrusted with motivating the community to •adopt more hygienic measures in child and household care. ••
Progress in the implementation of this program was delayed •for three years due to the absence of a suitable curriculum. A |second problem in the implementation of this Program was theabsence of suitable candidates for training. Finally, in December m1984, a workshop was held in Gilgit and a mixed group of LB&RD Iofficers, para-medical staff, primary school teachers, villagevolunteers and some members of the CBS Unit were qiven thistraining. No equipment was supplied to the trainees until December I1985. The Health Department representative on the CBS Unit was Iasked to monitor the performance of these workers and even this wasnot done, except once at the end of 1986. In any case, there did •not seem much point in monitoring this activity as no precise |responsibilities were fixed, and it was not clear what was to bemonitored. The complicated charts designed to monitor growth were _never really used. I
4. Summary and Conclusions
4.1. Sustainabi1itv Analysis I
II
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Community participation was to be instrumental in makinq theCBS Program sustainable. However, the support of the communitywas never really enlisted in a manner which would ensure thesuccess of the program. The level of community participation wasrestricted to the Village Project Committees and the sectoral sub-committees. The membership of these bodies was too narrow toensure the interest of the target population. The Program neededthe support of the community in all its stages from identificationto planning, implementation and monitoring. A majority of thevillage was rarely consulted, and the VPC was taken as a proxy forcommunity participation. The low level of achievements of Programtargets indicated the importance of involving the community in theProgram.
The role that the community could have played in theimplementation of the targets was highlighted by the approach usedby the Aga Khan Rural Support Program (AKRSP). The broad-basedVillage Organizations established by AKRSP could have been moreeffective in the achievement of the Program targets. In a jointmeeting between the staff of the CBS Program and AKRSP it wasagreed to use the forum of the Village Organization for alldevelopment work at the village level.
Where these Village Organizations were used in theimplementation of the targets a very different result was reported.A majority of the villagers were given a forum to articulate theproblems in the implementation of the Program targets and the paceof their achievement. Representatives from the CBS Unit and therepresentatives of the Village Organization were also invited toparticipate in the Monthly Managers Conference held in the AKRSPoffices in Gilgit. This monthly meeting gave the villagers a forumto establish direct contact with those responsible for deliveringthe requisite inputs. This was the first such opportunity affordedto the villagers. Taking the cue from this, some members of theCBS staff suggested more detailed contact between the villagerepresentatives and the CBS staff. This contact was made in day-long sessions immediately following the monthly meetings. The CBSmonitoring staff was particularly pleased with these meetings butthese were inexplicably discontinued.
The institutional framework within which the CBS Programfunctioned was very narrowly conceived. It did not make anyprovisions for making the Program a genuine community venture.The mechanisms which would have ensured the continuation of theProgram with minimal support from the donors were very weak. Therewas no process set in place for an ongoing assessment of communityneeds in the health and sanitation fields or for a method ofmeeting these. The utilization strategy which would have helpedto affix the user charges for the services of all trainees wasmissing. In the strategic documents plans were made to consult thecommunity on aspects of user charges but these were never reallyimplemented.
13
4.2. Synthesis of Effective Development Principles
The development principles which can be derived from thiscase study have been categorized into four broad areas. The issuesfrom which these arise are reported below:
14
II
The CBS Program had a large component of training but theprocedure laid out for the selection of the trainees did not •involve the community to any appreciable extent. The selection |procedure is crucial to the success of a training program as itdetermines the efficacy of the trainees and their acceptance by mthe client population. Selection by the community can also help Iweed out candidates who are unlikely to perform their functions orleave the village after the training. The selection strategyfollowed by the CBS staff was to secure the maximum number of Icandidates to ensure that the stated targets were met. This •approach did not indicate concern with the efficacy of thesetrainees or their use by the community after their training. The •program of TBA training suffered because of the selection of women |who were not suitable for the job. In the case of other traineeslike the Community Health & Nutrition Workers, the Program planners mcollected whomever they could and imparted the training without any Iclear understanding of what might be achieved by this. m
I
Organizational Issues «
o The target population must be involved in all aspects ofproject identification, preparation and implementation. Aproxy institution such as the VPC will not be effective. I
o Traditional institutions should be incorporated in thedevelopment process as far as possible. The CBS Program used •the VPC which did not wield any real authority in the |vi1lages.
o Inter-agency coordination is crucial to the success of a Iprogram. The four principal parties involved in the CBS *program did not clearly understand each other's motivationsfor participation in the Program. There was very little Idialogue between the two principal parties - the government Iand the community.
o A system of monitoring and evaluation provides key feedback Iin the implementation of the Program. The system of M&Einitially provided in the CBS Program did not encourage _consolidated reporting or follow up action. This was partly Iredressed by the new system introduced in 1984 when a separate 'M&E Unit was established.
III
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Implementation Issues
The selection of CBS villages, components of the packaqe- andtrainees was conducted without adequate consultation with thecommunity. The individual villages were not consulted toobtain their consent for participation in the CBS Program.Similarly, the community had not identified the package ofservices which they wanted. The package of basic services wasbuilt around the water supply scheme and attempts were madeto implement it in each village regardless of the community'sneed for it. The slow rate of progress in the achievement oftargets pointed to these serious drawbacks in the Program.All villages were treated as having identical health andsanitation profiles and needs, which they did not have.
The traditional division of labor was disregarded in somecomponents of the program. Women were given training incarpet and sharma weaving which is traditionally a man's ,iob.This oversight was corrected and the training discontinuedwhen the response of the community indicated the existence ofa problem. The expectation that women could market theproducts of the CWCs and arrange for the supply of rawmaterials was not in keeping with the traditional division oflabor in the villages and eventually two marketing specialistswere hired for the purpose.
Technical Issues
Some components of the CBS Program introduced items of newtechnology like the water supply schemes and the CommunityWomen's Centers. Both of these components required puttinginto place new institutional arrangements for their success.Although these arrangements were envisioned in the CBSProgram, in practice the arrangements were inadequate. Forinstance, the water supply schemes required arrangements formaintenance, supply of spare parts, and user charges to enablethe financing of the maintenance of these schemes. Similarly,the Community Women's Centers required backward and forwardlinkages with the market, which were missing. It was theinability of the program planners to visualize that newtechnologies require new institutional arrangements for theirsuccess which led to the poor performance in these components.
The staff of the CBS Program lacked the technical skills whichwere required for the success of the Program. The curriculumdesigned for the CH&NW was far from adequate and it was notclearly understood how the course contents would help toachieve the objectives of the CBS Program. The manner inwhich the training of the CH&NW was organized lackedunderstanding of the objectives of the Program. There wasinadequate technical input in the implementation of the watersupply schemes, the CWCs and other components of the Program.
15
16
II
The CBS Program expected to bring about behavioral changes inthe client population. This expectation is evident from the •number of targets which were explicitly added for |demonstration purposes. The mechanisms for introducing thesebehavioral changes were very weak. _
Economic Issues
The basic concept on which the designers of the CBS Program Irelied in expecting community participation was the notion of •self-help, i.e., the community was expected to participate inProgram activities simply because the Program was designed for •the benefit of the community. Such notions of self-help |ignore the concept of opportunity cost of labor. This was onefactor responsible for the unenthusiastic response of the «community. I
The considerations of supply and demand were not sufficientlyinvestigated when deciding on the kind of training that would Ibe imparted to village representatives. The same mistake was Imade in deciding on what would be produced by the CWCs. Asa result, the products of these Centers remained unsold. •
Proper arrangements were not made to ensure the remunerationfor the trainees. Excessive reliance on the concept of _volunteer services has led to the demise of many well Iconceived programs. ™
IIIIIIIII
IIIIIII• Annex 6
Understanding and Implementing Participatory Approaches
• 1. An Overview of Approaches to Development
• 2. Mistaken Notions of Community Participation
3. What Oo We Mean by Participation?
I 4. Planning for Local Development: The AKRSP DiagnosticSurvey
IIIIIIII
II
An Overview of Approaches to DevelopmentCommunity participation is the desired goal or implementation I
mechanism in many of the recent projects and programmes inPakistan. It is such a popular and attractive idea that its mere _mintion sometimes suffices to earn praise for a project. It is, Ihowever, implemented in many ways, some of which involve the *community only in a perfunctory manner, while others actuallynegate the intention behind community participation. •
One way of clarifying the concept of comunity participationis by comparing it with other approaches to development management. •The following typology suggests that three broad approaches to Idevelopment can be observed in Pakistan:
i) The managerial approach. in which project managers or Itechnical experts identify priorities, propose solutions, •design mechanisms, manage resources, and implement and monitorprojects. All of this is usually done according to pre- •determined blueprints and fixed rules and procedures by a |government agency or project management.
ii) The participatory approach, in which communities establish Itheir own institutions, identify their priorities, organizetheir resources, manage their development agenda, and forgethe necessary links for continuing technical and financial Iassistance by outside agencies. The supporting agency •provides technical and financial assistance, but it does notinfringe upon the sovereignty of the community organization: •decision making rests with the community, which can reject |the advice and judgement of project experts.
iii) The representative approach, often mistaken for community Iparticipation. In this approach, elected or nominated •representatives of a community determine the developmentagenda, interact with the development agencies, and otherwise Irepresent their community's interests as best as they can. IDecision making over development activities is delegated torepresentatives, who are accountable to their constituents at •the time of elections. |
2. Mistaken Notions of Community Participation _
Many projects pursuing community participation actually follow •the representative approach: they depend for decision making oninfluential residents, elected representatives, project committees, •etc. Projects which tend to depend on such representatives usually |take a project-oriented approach to participation, in which theobjective often is to obtain "free" labor or other resources from _the community, for execution or maintenance of projects. Because Iit requires community contributions to reduce the financial burden *of the project, this approach has been popularized in Pakistan as
1
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
a self-help approach. It is built into many projects and nationalprogrammes, including those of the Local Government and RuralDevelopment Departments, the watercourse renovation programs ofseveral major irrigation projects, and diverse social sectorprograms.
Financing local development through community contributionshas been known in South Asia since times immemorial: it is knownas begar, or conscription. Begar is a severe form of regressivetaxation exacted by village headmen or notables acting under feudalauthority. In this century, it was incorporated into Indian civiladministration by F. L. Brayne in his rural reconstruction programin the 1930s. In the Northern Areas, begar was used by the region'smany Mirs and Rajahs to construct physical infrastructure, developland, graze livestock, obtain meat and livestock products, and soon.
Even without the dependence on begar, an organization that iscontrolled by representatives will generally produce inefficientand regressive allocation of resources. The cooperatives inPakistan are a well known example. These cooperatives are createdunder legislation that gives practically all decision making powersto the executive committee of the cooperative. Unlike the orthodoxcooperatives in Europe from which the model for Pakistanicooperatives was drawn, the General Body of Pakistani cooperativesexists as a mere formality: cooperative office bearers are notreally accountable to the General Body. Understandably, theypursue their own interests, rather than those of the ordinarymembers.
This brings us to a well known problem of representativeapproaches to development - the alienation of public from privateinterest. Whether they are managing local water supply projects,watercourse renovation, or cooperatives, representatives who arenot accountable to the ordinary public will generally not performaccording to the public's expectations. In the worst case,representatives could become corrupt as well as inefficient.
In many instances, we can see that a desire for communityparticipation in development projects has degenerated into aninefficient, regressive and sometimes corrupt system. This hashappened because, instead of organizing the community to managedevelopment projects and resources, its representatives were giventhe resources and made responsible for decision making. In effect,representation was mistaken for particioation.
A more fundamental mistake is the belief that communityorganization exists for the purposes for which the project wantsto enlist community participation. Thus, project design andimplementation is often predicated on existing local governmentmechanisms, jirgas, youth organizations, welfare societies,cooperatives, trade associations, mosque committees, project
Icommittees and the like. Many of these organizations arerepresentative, rather than participatory organizations, and suffer _from the problems described above. Others are not suitable tor Idevelopment work: they may have transitory membership, a social •welfare orientation, limited resources and management capacity, orlittle or no correlation to the expected beneficiary base or user Igroup. The general situation in Pakistan is that traditional Iinstitutions have become weak or non-existent, and new institutionsfor the management of common problems have not yet emerged: there •is an institutional vacuum at the local level. I
We can summarize the preceding discussion by highlighting some _of the features of what is mistaken as an attempt at community •participation: •
o There is a limited, project-oriented focus; •
o The project seeks to finance local development throughcommunity contributions; this is considered self-help and mprovides the rationale for community participation; I
o In organizational terms, representation is mistaken forparticipation: decision making over projects and resources is Igiven to representatives, rather than to organized •communities; and,
o It is not realized that there is an institutional vacuum at |the local level, that community organization for developmenthas to be created and nurtured. »
3, What Do We Mean bv Participation? ™
An alternative approach starts from the last two points - that Ibroad-based, open and democratic community organization has to be Ithe first step in the process of development. This is a process-oriented approach. In this approach, it is recognized that local •development is best approached by creating and nurturing broad- |based community organizations. It is recognized thatrepresentative and participatory institutions represent two _distinct and opposite cultures of social organization and Idevelopment administration. In most instances, the representative •approach is an organizational closed shop, in which decision makingis the preserve of a few influential individuals; there are no •public hearings; accounts are not rendered to the general public |in open meetings; and interaction with development officials takesplace in offices, havelis, hujras and the like. In terms of the mmobilization of community manpower and capital, the capacity of •representatives for promoting sustainable development is extremelylimited. _
In contrast, the participatory approach should nurture an open Iprocess of dialogue and consensus; decision making by the General
II
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Body (i.e., all adult beneficiaries); financial and progressmonitoring by each and every ordinary citizen acting through theforum of the community organization; and interaction betweendevelopment officials and ordinary citizens in open commonassemblies. The community organization should be responsible fromthe very beginning to ordinary project beneficiaries, not. leadersand outsiders. From an early stage, community participation shouldgenerate capital and devise financial mechanisms that will form thebasis of financial and organizational sustainabi1ity over time.
Since this kind of community organization for development doesnot exist in most places, an investment has to be made to create,nurture and sustain it to the point of maturity. This requires,in the first instance, the organization of people around theircommon interest. It also requires continuing incentive to thepeople to stay organized. Different communities have differentinterests that bind them and move them to collective action. Theselocal interests cannot be identified with a distant planningprocess. Projects that aim to obtain community participation needa planning methodology that is responsive to local needs. The nextsection describes an established methodology used by AKRSP inplanning for village development; other planning methods can alsobe used effectively, provided they actually draw upon localperceptions and knowledge.
4. Planning for Local Development: The AKRSP Diagnostic purvey
The AKRSP Diagnostic Survey is presented as an example of aplanning methodology that could be utilized to improve theeffectiveness and equitability of the RWSS Project, and to generatecommunity participation in project activities. It is not, however,presented as a magic solution: like any other methodology, itsoutcome will depend greatly on the interest and commitment of thepractitioner-
The first thing that is needed is, in essence, a reversal ofthe expectations, norms of behavior and working rules thatcharacterize top-down approaches, whether bureaucratic/managerial,or political/representative. Those who seek communityparticipation have to accept the value and consequences ofcommunity participation. It is often difficult for experts toaccept that local solutions are sometimes more sensible in manyways than those of outsiders; many outsiders are convinced thatpoor people lack the knowledge to improve their condition, and thatall they need is the superior knowledge of outside experts. Thereis also a danger of going too far in the opposite direction, byromanticizing local practices to the extent that all local customand technology is considered "best" for the situation. The truthgenerally is that outside experts can, indeed, provide usefuladvice when markets and technology are changing. Their advice willbe most readily accepted by local people if it entails incrementalchanges, that is, the grafting of new techniques on traditional
II
practices and knowledge.
Project experts have to accept local villagers as their |partners in all stages of the project.' With this frame of mind,it would become possible to emloy the following methodoloqv to mgreat benefit. I
The identification and implementation of AKRSP's villageprojects is undertaken through a series of interactive dialogues Ibetween villagers and AKRSP management. There are three dialogues •(actually, three sets of dialogues); together, they constitute theDiagnostic Survey. The purpose of the Diagnostic Survey is to •identify village needs through open village meetings attended by |all villagers, and to engage the ingenuity and resources ofvillagers in designing and implementing solutions to common «problems. I
The three dialogues of the Diagnostic Survey correspond inthe following way to the first three stages of conventional project Icycles: I
First Dialogue Project Identification •Second Dialogue Project Preparation JThird Dialogue Project Appraisal
The Diagnostic Survey was initially developed for productive Iphysical infrastructure projects, such as irrigation channels, link *roads, etc. Over time, AKRSP's experience has taught it to use theDiagnostic Survey as a standard planning methodology for aJJ. its Iactivities, including credit, new agricultural technology, women's Iincome generating activities and improved resource managementsystems. The Diagnostic Survey has proved highly effective in •giving location-specific direction to AKRSP's technical sections, Iand in building viable programs on the basis of broad-basedparticipation in project identification, design, benefits andcosts. I
In order to simplify the following description of theDiagnostic Survey, it is assumed that the process is taking place •in a village that is being visited by management for the first |time, so that the focus of dialogue is productive physicalinfrastructure. m
The Diagnostic Survey starts with a visit by the Management •Group to a village whose residents have agreed to meet with AKRSPstaff. The General Manager initiates the first dialogue by •explaining the OBJECTIVES AND METHODS OF AKRSP to the villagers. •He then invites them to identify an income-generating project thatwould benefit all or most of the households in the village and that •could be undertaken by the villagers themselves. Almost |invariably, villagers are able to agree on a project of over-ridingimportance to all villagers. Thus, the result of the first _
I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
dialogue is the IDENTIFICATION of a small, productive project bythe residents of a village.
The identification of a project is followed by the secondseries of dialogues. The first step here involves a FEASIBILITYSURVEY of the proposed scheme. Supervisory responsibility for thistechnical assessment rests with the Program Senior Engineer.Responsibility in the field devolves on the Social OrganizationUnit. This unit works with informed village residents to assessthe feasibility of proposed and to obtain data on prices of locallyavailable inputs/material. It is on the basis of informationobtained locally that BLUEPRINTS and COST ESTIMATES are preparedby the field unit and sent to the Management Group forfinalization.
The finalized scheme is taken to the villagers by theManagement Group and discussed with them. This starts the thirddialogue, in which AKRSP and the residents of the villaqe explorethe TERMS OF PARTNERSHIP that would assign specific obligations toeach of the two entities. If willing, villagers could demonstratetheir ACCEPTANCE of these terms by convincing AKRSP about themanner in which they would organize to plan, implement, manage andmaintain specific projects that could involve physical works, skilldevelopment, new technology, loans and collective savings. At thisstage, a village Organization is formed, consisting of allbeneficiaries of the project. The formation of the organizationis followed by an ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT BENEFITS, conducted byconcerned members of the Management Group. The purpose of thisassessment is to assure that the project will benefit all or mostvillagers, and that there is no dispute over the proposed project.This completes the Diagnostic Survey.
The execution and maintenance of the project is theresponsibility of the Village Organization, and technical andfinancial assistance is provided by AKRSP as discussed in the Termsof Partnership. Monitoring the project is the responsibility ofeach villager as well as the Village Organization. During projectimplementation, all beneficiaries have to meet every week as theGeneral Body of the VO: there is no project committee and hodecision making by elected or self-appointed representatives. TheGeneral Body, in open village meetings, has to assignresponsibility for specific tasks, daily labor allocations for theproject, operation of project accounts, maintenance, etc. Thoseassigned tasks have to report to the General Body: accounts arepresented, progress is reviewed and problems are resolved. Oncea specific scheme has been executed, the responsibility for itsmanagement becomes completely vested in the Village Organization:villagers become responsible for all aspects of managing the schemethey had identified, helped plan and executed.
AKRSP's Social Organization Unit, consisting of a SocialOrganizer and an engineer, supervises the project, checks physical
6
Iprogress and the functioning of the Village Organization, and maKes"recommendations to management for payment of instalments and the mprovision of support services. It is rare for the management, to Ioverturn the recommendations of the Social Organization section. "The continuous monitoring of Village Organizations and the onqoingprocesses of training and supervision, together with follow-up Ivisits, provide the Management Group with the information it needs Ifor evaluation of persistence of results.
The Diagnostic Survey is summarized below in Figure 1. I
Figure 1 I
AKRSP Diagnostic Survey
IActivity Responsibility
First Dialogue: Project Identification
(a) Explanation of AKRSP Methods and Objectives General Manager I(b) Identification of Productive Rural Projects Villagers ™
Second Dialogue: Project Preparation
Third Dialogue: Project Appraisal
I(a) Feasibility of Physical Infrastructure Works Soc. Orq. Unit, _(b) Preparation of Blueprint or Objective Plan with villagers, I(c) Cost Estimation approval bv Sen 10 •
Engineer
I(a) Explanation of Terms of Partnership General Manager J(b) Acceptance/Rejection of Terms of Partnership Villagers(c) Assessment of Benefits and Equitability Management _
IIIII
Annex 6
IIIIIII• Terms of Partnership for
Project Implementation by Village Organizations
IIIIIIIIIII
by technical staff of the LB4RD and AKRSP will be given dueconsideration and acted upon.
1
IIThese are the terms of partnership proposed for collaboration between the Local
Bodies and Rural Development Department and the Village Organizations for the mImplementation of water supply schemes. I
IPart I
1. The Village Organization will hold regular weekly meetings duringthe implementation of the Project and at regular intervals •thereafter for scheme operation and maintenance: attendance by |all members will be ensured as far as possible.
2. One-fourth of the labor cost of the Rural Water Supply & Sanitation I(RWSS) Project will be saved for deposit in weekly savings during ™the development of the project. Savings scheme will continue evenafter the completion of the project. I
3. The project will be completed within the estimated costs, and norevisions will be entertained under any circumstances. The •estimated amount is a grant on behalf of the Government of Pakistan |and not subject to increases.
4. After completion of the project the responsibility for maintenance Ishall exclusively rest with the Organization. Furthermore, •compensation for land affected by the project will also be arrangedby the Organization. H
5. During the construction of the project suggestions and advice given
I6. Repairs to damage due to any natural disaster to a completed or _
ongoing project will also be the responsibility of the IOrganization, and under this or the conditions of Article No. 4 •the Organization will not claim assistance from LB&RQ or for thatmatter from any other agency. •
7. It shall be the duty of each member in the Organization to checkand verify the progress and expenditure of the water supply scheme munder execution. Each member shall ensure proper records of savings Iattendance and other matters.
10. A two-thirds majority of the total members in the Organization can Iremove any office bearer. *
8. The last instalment of the project shall be paid only after the •completion of the project, and on such certification by at least |755K of the members through a resolution, which should be attestedby the LB&RD engineers or AKRSP sub-engineers (if requested by _LB&RD). * I
9. The Organization will nominate its members for specialist training
I
IIIIIIIIIIIII1IIIII
which will be coordinated by LB&RD.
10. It shall be the duty of the Organization to utilize the service ofthe trained (skilled) specialist and pay the service charges incash or kind.
11. The Organization shall provide assistance to the Women'sOrganization of its village, e.g., it will help improve the accessof the program to the Women's Organization, encourage theirparticipation in the hygiene education program, help identify thegreater involvement of women in the sanitation program.
12. Instruments and materials or finances given to the Organizationfor any project by LB&RD should be returned to LB&RD if not used.
13. The Organization shall give an understanding that any projectinitiated with the assistance of LB&RD shall not result in damageor loss to anyone.
14. The Organization shall ensure that until the completion of theproject there are no differences within or without theOrganization, pertaining to the project and there is no casepending in a court of law.
Part II
1. VO. Name:
2. Project identified by the VO
3. Date 4. Total savings Rs.
5. Total members 6. Total households
We, the members of Village Organization herebyagree that any assistance or grant provided by LB&RD for our villagewould be conditional on our undertaking to complete the project and toincrease collective savings.
Savings
Before getting a grant for the project, the savings of the VO areRs. . Before completion of the project, 1/4th portion of laborcharges would be compulsorily deposited in the savings. The savingswould continuously be increased even after the completion of theproject.
Project Implementation Program
1. Project will be initiated with effect from _ _ and shallbe completed by , that is, in months. During thisperiod at least members will work daily on the project.
1/4th
1/2
3/4
on
on
on
Completed on
II
2. Project work would be completed according to the followingstipulated time schedule: •
II
If not completed on above mentioned specified dates, LB&RD shall have •full power/authority to stop payment of installments. I
Mode of Payment
LB&RD will pay 20* of the total labor cost plus the entire material 'cost (i.e. 100X) at the Third Dialogue in the presence of all VO memberson acceptance of the aforementioned terms on the receipt of VO •resolution duly recommended and forwarded by the concerned LB&RD |engineer or SO and Engineer (if requested by LB&RD).
All members will adhere to the above conditions. I
Signatures of members of Village Organization
IIIIIIIIII
1111111111111111111
Table 1Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7Fig. 1Table 8Table 9
Annexure 7
Costing Methodology of Northern Areas
Water Supply Schemes
Material and Labour Costs in Northern Areas in July 1989Water Supply Scheme - without Storage without Treatment
Sma 11with Storage,
with Storage
with Storage
with Treatment for
with Treatment for
with Treatment for
for Smal1 Vi1laqeWater Supply Scheme -Small VillageWater Supply Scheme -Medium Vi1lageWater Supply Scheme -Large Vi1lageSummary of Cost and Main Features of Water Supply Schemesproposed in the Plan
Human Waste Disposal
Human Waste Disposal - Twin Pit Pour Flush LatrinePour Flush Latrine with Twin Soakaway PitsHuman Waste Disposal - VIP LatrineHuman Waste Disposal - Modifications of Balti Latrine
Material and L
Description of Item
Q.I. pipe (KPM) 1/2"3/4"1"1-1/4"1-1/2"2"2-1/2"3"
Unskilled labourSemi-skilled mason/plumberSkilled mason/plumberCement (each bag)Timber (Govt rate)Timber (open market)Aggregate
Gravel mixed with sandStone
Crushed stone
Table 1
abour Costs in Nprthern
Cost in QiIqit (Rs)
10 per foot1 2 "1 6 "22 "28 "32 "40 "45 "
40 - 50100 -120180 -220115 -1204580
Areas in July 1989
Cost in Remote Areas
Add transport cost asbe1ow:-do--do--do--do--do--do-
Add boarding & lodgingcosts-do-- do-
VariesVaries
25/load of 25-30 cu.ft. Variesplus carriage -do-50/load plus carriage30/load of 25 cu.ft.+
-do-330/day -do-
transport (4 to 5 loads)5/cu ft. -do-
11
111111
11
Transport cost (from source) 15-20 per maund inaccessible areas
(from R'Pindi) 6,500 per full6 to 8 tons.
load of
60-80 per maund inremote areas (e.g.Gulmit;Astore,Skardu)
Add for accessible orremote areas as thecase may be.
IIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 2
Water Supply Scheme
Type of Scheme : Without Storage Without Treatment for Small Village(Avg.Pop. of Village - 340) Description of the System: Spring capping+ 11,000 feet of transmission and distribution pipeline and stand posts.
i. Cost of Soring Capping (4'x 4'x 4')including cover R,s.
132 eft of stone masonry «Rs 18 = 2,3764.5' x 4.5' wooden cover «Rs 25 = 550
Total 3,926
"i "i • Cost of 11.000 feet of Pipeline
Galvanized Iron Pipe (KPM)1/2" dia 3,500' «Rs 10 35,0003/4" " 800' «Rs 12 9,6001" " 3,000' «Rs 16 48,0001-1/2" " 1,700* «Rs 28 47,6002" " 1,000' «Rs 32 32,0003" " 1,000' «Rs 45 45,000
Sub Total 217,200Add 15X for Q.I. fittings 32,600Add Rs 1.5 per foot as handling charges 16,500
i i i. Cost of Labour
Skilled labour 100 man-days • Rs 300a. Trench Making 3'x2'x11000' 55,000b. Fixing 11000' 14.725
Unskilled labour for pipelaying 3' below ground 69,726©Rs 2.5 cu. ft. of 66,000 cu. ft. of excavation
iv. Cost of 5 standposts in a small village 51,0009 Rs 1,000 per standpost
Total Cost: 344,951Say 345,000
Note: As this type of schemes will be mostly installed for small communities,of average population 340 people, per capita cost = Rs, 1,014
Table 3
Water Supply Scheme
lion
TotalSay
2,37624,000
186,41069,72532,0005,000
319,511324,000
Per Capita Cost = Rs 953.00
IIIIType of Scheme : With Storage. Treatment for Small Village
(Avg. POP of Village = 340)
Description of the system: IIntake + sedimentation tank + slow sand filter + 11,000 ft of •pipeline + storage tank 4,000 gallons + 5 standposts
Estimated Cost (with KPM Pipe)
i. Intake 2,376 |ii. Sedimentation tank + slow sand filter 24,000
3,000 gallons overall capacity _• Rs 8 per gallon I
iii. Pipeline 11,000 ft. 266,300 •iv. Labour charges 69,725v. Storage tank 10,000 gallons © Rs 8 per gallon 32,000 •vi. Standposts 5,000 |
INote: As this type of schemes will be mostly installed in large Ivillages, of average population 340, per capita cost = Rs I r/6 I
Estimated Cost (with ordinary pipe)
i. Intake "J *7ft •ii. Sedimentation tank + slow sand filter
3,000 gallons overall capacity •• Rs 8 per gallon |
iii. Pipeline 11,000 ft.iv. Labour charges D S , / « Hv. Storage tank 10,000 gallons 9 Rs 8 per gallon 32,000 Ivi. 5 Standposts r n"n
IIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 4
Water Supply Scheme
Type of Scheme : With Storage, with Treatment For Medium Village(Avg. POP of Village = 1.200)
Description of the system:Intake + sedimentation tank + slow sand filter + 20,000 ft ofpipeline + storage tank 12,000 gallons + 15 standpoets
Estimated Cost (with KPM Pipe)
i. Intakeii. Sedimentation tank + slow sand filter
8,000 gallons overall capacity9 Rs 8 per gallon
iii. Pipeline 20,000 ft.iv. Labour chargesv. Storage tank 12.000 gallons O Rs 8 per gallonvi. 15 Standposts
1 Ion
TotalSay
2,37664,000
484,000130,00096,00015,000
791,376795,000
Note: As this type of schemes will be mostly installed in largevillages, of average population 1,011, per capita cost = Rs 737
Estimated Cost (with ordinary pipe)
i. Intakeii. Sedimentation tank + slow sand filter
8,000 gallons overall capacity• Rs 8 per gal Ion
iii. Pipeline 20,000 ft.iv. Labour chargesv. Storage tank 12,000 gallons « Rs 8 pervi. 15 Standposts
lion
TotalSay
264
3201309615
627630
,376,000
,000,000,000,000
,376,000
Table 5
Water Supply Scheme
Estimated Cost (with KPM Pipe)
Estimated Cost (with ordinary pipe)
III
Type of Scheme : With Storage, with Treatment for Large,. Vi I l_ag_e I(Avg. POP of Village = 3.300) I
Description of the system: •Intake + sedimentation tank + slow sand filter + 37,000 ft o-f Ipipeline + storage tank 52,000 gallons + 40 standposts
Ii. Intake 2,376 |ii. Sedimentation tank + slow sand filter 160,000 |
20,000 gallons overall capacitytt Rs 8 per gal Ion m
iii. Pipeline 37,000 ft. 850,000 Iiv. Labour charges 229,400v. Storage tank 32,000 gallons e Rs 8 per gallon 256,000vi. 40 Standposts 40,000 I
INote: As this type of schemes will be mostly installed in large _villages, of average population 1,011, per capita cost - Rs 737 I
Ii. Intake 2,376 |ii. Sedimentation tank + slow'sand filter 160,000
20,000 gallons overall capacity _• Rs 8 per gallon I
iii. Pipeline 16,000 ft. 254,341 •iv. Labour charges 101,418v. Storage tank 10,000 gallons « Rs 8 per gallon 80,000 I
IIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 6
Summary of Cost and Main Features of Water Supply SchemesProposed in the Plan
SchemeSize
Small
Medium
Large
Avg.latiVill
1,
3,
Popu-on ofage
340
200
300
Avg.holdVill
House-perage
43
150
412
No. ofStandpost
i
5
15
40
TankCapac-ity! (cials)
4,000
12,000
32,000i ., .i
Pipe(Rft)
i
11,
20,
37,
000
000
000
JSedime-Intation! Tank! faals)
! 3,000
i 8,000
i20,000
, TotalCost
! Rs.
324,
630,
1,540,
000
000
000
Table 7
Human Waste Disposal
Twin-Pit Pour-Flush Latrine - Unit Cost (July J.98JJCost
Donor's share Rs
150
240
160
150
500
Pan + P-trap
Cement 2 bags
PVC pipe with cowl
Chick mesh
Transportation of all materials(remote areas)
Total
Community's share
Sand 5 eft
Aggregate 10 eft
Stone 20 eft
Labour unskilled
Skilled labour
Wood for shuttering
Superstructure
1 ,200
Total
Grand TotalSay
4
55
20
40
40
400
400
200
3000
"."Too
,300,400
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
POUR FLUSH LATRINE WITH TWIN SOAKiOWAY PITS(ALL DIMENSIONS ARE MINIMUM DESIRABLE FOR USE HOUSE HOLD ONLY
3 - 5
(D
SECTION
3 - 5
JUNCTION BOX
SCALE : 3 / 8 = l - 0
3 - 5
\ \
i i
\\ \\ iI I
PLAN 1
SOURCE:) - WASA,QUETTA
2 - APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY FOR WATER SUPPLYAND SANITATION BY DUNCAN MARA
lAI
Table 8
Human Waste Disposal
VIP Latrine - unit cost (July 1989)
Donor's share
Pan
Cement 2 bags
Vent pipe with cowl
Steel reinforcement
Transportation of all materials at site
Total
Community's share
Sand 5 eft
Aggregate 10 eft
Stone 10 eft
Labour unskilled
Skilled labour
Wood for shuttering
Superstructure
CostRS
130
240
160
150
500
1 , 180
Total
Grand TotalSay
20
40
20
200
200
200
3,000
3,680
4,8604,900
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 9
Human Wa 'fce Disposal
Modifications of Baiti Latrine - Unit Cost (July 1989)
Addition of a wall to form two compartmentsin the existing Baiti Latrine
Size of wall = 8 x8 x 1-1/2 = 96 cu. ftsay 100 cu. ft
Cost of 1 cu. ft. of masonry work
Total cost of masonry work
Cost of wooden door to cover the openingfor decomposed excreta
Total cost
Donor's share
Cement (5 bags a Rs 120)
Transportation of all materials
Skilled labour (mason, carpenter)
Total
Community's share
Stone 125 cu. ft. 9 Rs. 3
Sand 20 cu. ft. « Rs. 3
Unskilled labour
Wood
CostRs.
18
1 ,800
200
2,000
600
450
200
1 ,250
Total
Grand TotalSay
12
375
60
200
100
735
,985,000
TableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTableTable
Annex 8
Costing Details and Physical Targets of the Investment Plan
TableTableTableTable
TableTableTableTable
Table 9
Table 10
11121314151617181920
Investment Plan for the Northern AreasCost of Proposed Water Supply PlanProposed Plan for Water Supply in Northern AreasEstimated Coverage of Proposed Water Supply Planin 1993-1998Rehabilitation Program for Existing NAPWD SchemesRehabilitation Program for Existing LB&RD SchemesExisting Schemes to be RehabilitatedOperation and Maintenance Program for New WaterSupply Schemes.Sanitation Coverage Plan for Villages with NewWater Supply SchemesSanitation Coverage Plan for Villages with OldWater Supply SchemesCost of Water Quality Control and Testing ProgramCost of Human Resource Development ProgramHuman Resource Development ProgramCost of Hygiene Education ProgramRevolving Fund for CreditInstitutional Strengthening of LB&RD
Strengthening of PWDStrengthing of AKRSPStrengthening of Department of HealthStrengthening of the Northern Areas
Table 21
InstitutionalInstitutionalInstitutionalInstitutionalPolytechnicForeign Technical Assistance Program
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 1
Investment Plan For Northern Areas
(Constant Prices 1988-89) iRs.'OOOl
, SectorComponent
•
New Water Supply
[Scheies1
!
•Rehabilitation
Table 2
Cost of PropoBed Water Supply Plan
(Constant
iYear
11990-9111991-92',1992-93
1
1993-9411994-95',1995-9611996-97i1997-98
Total
Pricea 1988-89)
! PHD1 (Large
'No. ofSehetea
889
99
•
43
Schetea1
Coat
12,32012,32013,860
13,86013,860
66,220
LB&RD and, (Siall a
Stall
No. ofScheiea
151515
1617171618
129
Hediui
No
VOaScheiea)
Medlut
. ofCoat Scheiea
444
55565
41
,860,860,860
184508508184832
796
151515
1515151618
124
999
9991011
78
Cost
,450,450,450
,450,450,450,080,340
.120 1
TotalCoat
141414
1414141517
19
,310,310,310
,634,958,958,264,172
.916 '
ii LBARD andi (Stall
! Stall
No. of,Scheiea
444
44465
si
111
11
Coat
,296,296,296
,296,296,296,944,620
,340
i HediutU6aScheies
Nedlui
No. ofScheiea
777
88766
56
444
5543i
35
Cost
,410,410,410
,040,040,410,780,780
.280
)
TotalCost
555
66555
46
,706,706,706
.336,336,706.724.400
.620
Iks.'000)
! Grand !! Total !
3232
, 33
34352020U
232
,336 I,336 !,876 i
,830 !,154 !,664 1.988 i,572 1
,756 ',
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 3
Proposed Plan for inter Supply in Northern Areas
! Institutions
! PHD
!Large Village
i ocneies
! LBaRD and VOs
iSiall a Hediui[Village Scheies
! LBfcRD and UOs
iSiall a Kediui!Village Scheies
i
ii
iDistrictsi
i
IGilgitIBtltistaniDiaiiri
!Totaliii
IGilgit :ii
iBaltistaniii
!Totali .. .....iii
IDiaiir :iii
!Total
fill.Site
LargeLargeLarge
—...
SiallHediuiSi&llMedial
SiallMediui
1990-91
341
8
11847
30
47
11
1991-92
251
8
11847
30
47
11
1992-93
351
9
11847
30
47
11
Total1990-93
8143
25
33241221
90
1221
33
1993-94
I52
9
12847
31
48
12
1994-95
351
9
12758
32
48
12
1995-96
12fi69
32
47
11
1996-9?
12749
32
««
12
1997-98
138510
36
5fi
11
Total1993-98
5103
18
613«2343
163
2336
Total i1990-98!
1324 i6 !
43
»4 i60 i35 !64
253 j
35 i$6 !
91 !
Ttble 4
8»tinted Coverage of Propoied Hater Supply Scheie in 1993 aid 1998
(
11
iDiitrlcti
i
ii
i
GilgitIBtltittuDiuir
Total
Additional villageicovered 1990-93
Siall led m a
33 2412 2112 21
$7 6<
Urge
8143
25
rotal
654736
148
(Total Nolof vill.{coveredilcua.)! 1993
14712969
345
Pop.coveredIcua.)1993
1S7.290138,03073,830
369,150
X ofTotal pop.covered
49.6%44.4X40.8X
45.6X
Additional villagescovered 1993-98
Siall
612323
107
Medial
364335
114
Urge 1
5103
18
Fotal
1027661
239
! Total Hilof vill(covered( (CUI.I( 1998
249205130
584
).Pop. X of
coveredTotal pop.Icua.j covered1998
321.210264.450167,700
753,360
83.7X72.7X77.3*
78.IX
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIJ
Table 5
Rehabilitation Prograi For Existing NAPVD Scheies
(Constant Prices 1988-89) iRs.'OOO)111
1
11
Tear
1990-911991-921992-93
Total
Haintenance
No. of Rehab.Scheies Cost (Rs.)
8 Nil00
....................8 Nil
Minor Repair
No. of Rehab.Scheies Cost (Rs.)
2 328,2005 820.5000
7 1.148.700
Hajor Repair
........No. of Rehab.Scheies Cost (Rs.)
2 875,2002 875,2003 1,312,800
7 3,063,200
TotalCost !(Rs.l '
i
1,203,4001,695,700 !1,312,800
4,211,900
Table 6
Rehabilitation Prograi For Existing LBIRD Scheies
(Constant Prices 1988-891 (Rs.'OOO)
1t
1
SYear
11990-9111991-921992-93
Total
Maintenance
No, of Rehab.Scheies Cost IRs.)
20 Nil00
......20 Nil
Minor Repair
No. of Rehab.Scheies Cost IRs.i
15 474,75023 727,95023 727,950
SI 1,930,650
Na.jor Repair
No, of Rehab.Scheies Cost IRs.l
11 928,40018 1,519,20018 1,519,200
47 3,966,800
Total !Cost !IRs.i ;
1.403,1502,247,150 I2,247.150 !
i
5,897,450 i
Average cost of existing NAPVD scheies : Rs. 1,094,000Average cost of existing LBtRD scheies = Rs. 211,000Cost of linor repair = 15X of tvg, scheie costCost of lajor repair = 401 of avg. scheie cost
Table 7
Existing Scheies To Be Rehabilitated
•
1
!Level of; Repairii
i
!MaintenanceMinor Repairlia.ior Repairi
Total
PHD Schemes
No. ofScheies
81n
n
\ of TotalScheies
20%15X
m
LBtRD
No. ofScheies
2U614?
m
Scheies
% of Total;Scheies
m
31X'
m
No. of scheies iipleiented by NAPHD - 44No. of scheies iipleiented by LBttRD = \»
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 8
Operation and Maintenance Progran for
New Water Supply Schesea
(Constant Prices 1988-89) iks.'fioui
Tear
1990-911991-921992-93
1993-94,1994-961995-961996-97
11997-98
Total
MAPWD Scheies1 Consumer's
No. ofScheiesto beMaintained
81625
3443434343
Share)
TotalOfcN Cost
246493770
1,0471,3241.3241,3241 , 3 2 4
7,852
LBfcRD Scheies iiConunitjr
No. ofScheiesto be
Maintained
4182
123
16621025329?344
s Share 1 i
Total 1OU Cost !
400 1801 !
1,201 1
1,6202.046 12,4«0 ,2,879 j3,331
14.738
Table 9
Sanitation Coverage Plan For Villages With New Water Supply Scheies
(Constant Prices 1)88-89)
[Type of!Activity||
{Motivation!(Ko. of Vill.)||1
1|
!Demonstration!(Ho. of Latrines)
i
Credit ForLatrines
District
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
Total
TotalCost (is.1
(Us.'
VillageSize
....
LargeLargeLarge
LargeLargeLarge
000)
000)
1990-91
221512
1107560
245
98
1991-92
211612
1058060
245
98
125
1992-93
221612
1108060
250
100
200
1993-94
221614
1108070
260
104
300
1994-95
22IB13
1109065
265
106
300
1995-96
18H11
907055
215
86
300
1996-97
li)1312
956560
220
88
1997-98
U1511
1057555
235
94
Total !
HI 1123 !97 !
835 !615 1485 !
1,935 i
774 !
1.225 :
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 10
Sanitation Coverage Plan For Villages With Old Water Supply Scheies
(Constant Prices 19i., , „ .
{Type of{Activity
{Motivation{(No, of Vill.)
{Demonstration1(No. of Latrines)
|1|11|1|
|
1
I Credit ForI Latrines
S8-89)
{District
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
Total
TotalCost (Rs.'OOO)
(RB.'OOO)
1990-91
11114
555520
no
52
1991-92
11114
555520
130
52
75
1992-93
11114
555520
130
52
100
1993-94
10105
505025
125
50
200
1994-95
10105
5U5025
125
50
200
1995-96
10104
505020
120
48
200
1996-97
10104
505U20
120
48
1997-98
993
454515
105
42
Total ,
82 I
n ;33 !
410 !410 !165 1
985 {
394:
775 i
Table 11
Cost of Water Quality Control and Testing Prograi
(Constant Prices 1988-9 Us.'000)
{Activity 1990-91 1991-92 1992-93Total
1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 Costi i , i
{Water Quality!Survey For NAi
iEstablishment of|3 District Level{Laboratoriesii
{Distribution of{Water Testing tits{to Dispensers
500
900
40
500
40 40 40 40
900
200
{Total (Rs.'OOO) 1,440 40 40 40 40 500 2.100
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIii
Table 12
Cost of H U M S Resource Development Prograi
(Constant Prices 1988-89) (Rs.'OOO)
jl
'2
13
|4
III
jl
12
13
III
;i
12
13
J4
III• !
12
Category
Field Staff
Training of SocialOrganisers(6-12 lonths)Training of Overseers(3-6 lonths)Training of HoienCoordinators(6-12 tonths)Field Staff (NAPWD)(1-3 lontbs)
Manageient Staff
Senior LBIRD andMAPVD Engineers(1-2 weeks)Monitoring andEvaluation Staff(1-3 lonths)Mid Level Staff of NAPWD(1-3 lonths)
Technical Staff
Village LevelDispensers(2-5 days)Lab, Technicians(1-3 lonths)Village LevelPluibers(1-4 weeks)Scheie MaintenanceTraining(6-8 daysl
Foriegn Training
Senior LBIRD Staff(3 lonthsj ,Mid Level Staff(3 lonths) !
Total (Rs.'OOO) !
j 1990-91
160
! 80
80
75
10
20
10
40
15
20
146
100
100
856
1991-92 1
160
80
80
75
10
20
10
40
20
146
641
992-93
160
80
75
5
10
40
20
146
536
1993-94
45
5
20
40
22
146
278
1994-95
45
5
20
40
n
146
278
1995-96
45
5
10
n
146
228
1996-97 1997-98
45 45
5 5
10
n 22
140 146
228 218
Total
480
240
160 !
450
$0
40
90 1
200 i
15 i
/ 170 j
1.168 j
100 j
100 j
3,263 i
Table 13
Huian Resource Development Prograi
[I
1
2
U
4
II
11
2
3
III
1
2
3
4
IV
1
2
Category
Field Staff
Training of SocialOrganizers16-12 Months!Training of Overseers(3-6 lonths)Training of HoienCoordinators(6-12 lonthslField Staff (HAPHD)(1-3 nonths)
Hanageaent Staff
Senior LBIRD andNAPHD Engineers(1-2 weeks)Monitoring andEvaluation Staff(1-3 lonths)Hid Level Staff of NAPHD(1-3 lonthsj
Technical Staff
Village LevelDispensers(2-5 days)Labi Technicians11-3 Months)Village LevelPluabers(1-4 weeks 1Schene MaintenanceTraining(6-8 days!
foriegn Training
Senior LBfcRD Staff(3 *onths)Mid Level Staff13 Months)
Total
1990-91
4
4
2
5
2
2
1
3
10
73
1
1
128
1991-92
4
4
2
5
I
2
1
20
10
73
123
1992-93
4
4
5
1
1
20
lti
73
118
1993-94
5
1
2
11
Vi
112
1994-95
5
1
2
20
11
73
112
1995-96
5
1
1
11
73
91
1996-97
5
1
1
11
73
91
1997-98
6
1
11
73
90
Total !
12 !
\l !
\ ;
4d !
10 !
4 !
» !
&* i
y4 :
I ;
I :
862
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 14
Cost of Hygiene Education Prograi
(Constant Prices 1988-89) (Rs.'OOO)
II
III
ilH
iiv
Prograi
Workshops
- Village Level- Management Level
Research
* Message Development- Monitoring andEvaluation
Training
- Line DepartmentsStaff
- In Service- Village Level
Input Supply..........
- Supply of Inputsat Village
- Supply of SubsidizedInputs
- Revolving Fund forCredit **
Total (Rs.'OOO)
1990-91
3020
1020
20
20
20
30
170
1991-92
20
1020
20
20
20
30
50
140
1992-93
20
1020
20
5020
20
30
50
190
1993-94
2040
1020
20
20
20
30
50
180
1994-95
20
1020
20
20
20
30
140
1995-96
20
1020
20
5020
20
30
ISO
1996-97
20
1020
20
20
20
30
140
1997-98
20
1020
20
20
20
30
140
. ......
TotalCost
170SO !
80 !160 !
160
ioo !160 !
160 !
240 !
150 !
1,290 !
** Credit fund is not included in the total cost.
Table 15
Revolving Fund for Credit
(Constant Prices 1988-8 (Rs.'OOO)
!Activity
ii
[Bouse Connection[for Water Supply
Rehabilitation oflater Supply Scheies
Sanitation
Hygiene Educationii
Total Us,'000)1
1990-91
1,250
1,250
1991-92
1,750
200
200
50
2,200
1992-93
3,250
200
300
50
3.800
1993-94
200
500
50
750
1994-95 1995-96 1
200
500 500
700 500
996-97 1997-98 Total
6,250
800 !
2,000 !
150 !
0 0 9,200 !
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 16
LBfcRDRural Hater Supply and Sanitation UnitCost of Institutional Strengthening
(Constant Prices 1988-89) Total Cost of Personnel IRs.'OOO)
! Category
{I Field Staff
| M 4 E Officers! Assistant Engineers| District CoordinatorsI Accountants! Social Organizers| Overseers||II Nanageient Staffi
i
I Deputy Director! K t E Unit! Executive Engineer
Project Coordinator! Accountanti
|III Support Staff
Coiputer OperatorsDrivers
i LDC
Total Cost
1990-91
1081441449011048
909072
n48
13812048
1,322
1991-92
1191581589922196
9999797953
15213253
1,597
1992-93
131174174109243106
109109878758
16714558
1.757
1993-94
144192192120267116
120120969664
18416064
1,933
1994-95
158211211132294128
13213210510570
20217670
2,126
1995-96
174232232145323141
14514511611677
III19377
2,338
1996-97
191255255159356155
15915912812885
244213*5
2.572
.......
1997-98
210281 '281 '175391170
175175 '140 !140 !94 !
269234 !94 !
2,830 !" i
Total Cost of Equipment (Rs.'OOOl
Equipment
Jeeps! CoiputerS Purnituri Office E
1 Total
106
(Rs275,(RslOO,
200,250,
000)000)000000
Total |
2
3
750 !500 !200250 !
700 !
(Constant Prices 1988-89) Cost of Recurrent Expenditures IRs.'OOOl
|Recurrent Expendituresi . . . . . . . . .......... ..i
Office ExpendituresSupplies
1 Travel « PerdieisI Operation of Vehicles
! , Total
1990-91
1005050300
500
1991-
1005050300
500
1992-93
1005050300
500
1993-94
1005050300
500
1994-96
loo5050300
500
1996-96
1006050300
500
1996-9?
1005050300
500
i
1997-98'
100 i50 i50 !300
500------
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL
IIIIIIIIIIIII1III1
Table 17
Institutional StrengtheningPHEC k NAPVD
(Constant Prices 1988-89) (Rs.'OOOl
! Category
! I Personnel
|1 Public Health Engineer
|2 Public Health Administrator
|3 Support Staff
|4 Administrative Staff to Collect! User Charges
|5 Coiputer Operators
! Sub Total
! II Equipment
! Vehicles
| Coiputer
I Survey Equipment
! Sub Total
! Ill Administrative Expenses
Grand Total
! 1990-91
1 900
48
50
300
180
1,478
550
300
300
1150
200
2,828
1991-92
900
48
50
300
180
1,478
400
400
200
2,078
1992-93
900
48
50
300
180
1,478
400
400
200
2,078
1993-94
900
48
50
300
180
1,478
0
200
1,678
1994-95
900
48
50
300
180
1,478
200
1,678
1995-96
900
48
50
300
180
1,478
U
200
1,678
1996-97
900
48
50
300
180
1,478
0
200
1,678
1997-98'
900 i
48
50 !
300 !
180 !
1,478 i
0 !
200 !
1,678 !
Table 18
Constant Prices 1988-89)
|I
|1
12
in
Category
Personnel
tfoien's Coordinatorfor Social SectorProgms
Kid-level TrainingSpecialist
Equipment
VehicleCoiputerOther Equipment
Total
1990-91
180
180
275100175
910
Ag» Khan RuralInstitutional
1991-92
180
180
000
360
1992-93
180
180
000
360
Support PrograiStrenghtening
1993-94
180
180
000
360
180
180
000
360
1994-95
180
180
000
360
1995-96
180
180
000
360
1996-97
180
180
000
360
(Rs.'OOO
1997-98
180
180
000
360
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 19
Institutional StrengtheningDepartment of Health
(Constant Prices 1988-89) i.'OOO)
II
! 1.
! Z<
! 3.
! <•
III
III
Category
Personnel
Health Educationist (1)
District HealthEducationists (3)
Support Staff
Field Staff
Bquipient
Vehicle (4)Mobile Health Units (3)Coiputer (1)Technical BquipientScoorters
Recurrent Expenditure
Total Cost
1990-91
72
144
200
200
1,1001,800
100400200
600
4816
1991-92
72
144
200
200
500
600
1716
1992-93
72
144
200
200
600
600
1816
Total1990-93
216
432
600
600
1,1001,800
1001,500200
1,800
8348
1993-94
72
144
200
200
200
600
1416
1994-95
72
144
200
200
500
600
1716
1995-96
72
144
200
200
500
600
1716
1996-97
72
144
200
200
200
600
1416
1997-98
72
144
200
200
600
1216
Total1993-98
720
1,000
1,000
000
1,4000
4480
Total1990-98
576 i
1,152 !
1,600 ;
1,600
1,100 i1,800 I
100 !2,900 !
200 !
11028 !
Table 20
Institutional StrengtheningPolytechnic in the Northern Areas
(Constant Prices 1988-8 (Rs.'OOO)111ri Category
|1 Course Curriculum I Development
! Attachieat of PVD 1 LBiRD! Engineers to Polytechnic
| Student Internship Progr&M
| Assigninet of Engineers froii Other Parts of the Country
2 Library Resources
3 Equipment (Coiputers 2)
Total Cost
Total Total Total1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1990-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1993-98 1990-98
„ . i
0 200 200 200
1I
0 100 100 100 300 300 'I
0 50 50 100 100 !
]
0 1 0 0 i>0 15ii 15"i ;
0 2uO low HIII.I m m '
0 0 0 0 500 50 30D 100 Ion 1,050 1.050 ;
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIII1IIIIIII
Table 21
Institutional StrengtheningForeign Technical Assistance Prograi
(Constant Prices 1988-89) (Hi.'000)
! Category
|I Expatriate Staff
|A. Long Ten
! Economist, (24 lonths)! Monitoring t Evaluation,! Rural Water Supply I! Sanitation Unit, LBIRD
! Hygiene Educationi Specialist, (24 lonths)1 Health Education Unit,! Dept. of Health
! Engineer, (24 lonths)! Norther Area Polytechnic! Dept. of Education
|B, Short T e n
i Public Health Engineer,(6mth)i PHEC, PVD
! Public Health Engineer,(6mth)1 RVSS, LBaRD
! Hygiene Education Specialisti (6mths), RHSS, [.BIRD
!C, Support Staffj Coiputer Operators ]! Drivers !
Total Cost of Expatriate Staff!
I 1990-91
i 3,024
3,024
5524
6,127
1991-92 1
3,024
3,024
756
756
5524
7,639
Total992-93 1990-93 1993-94
6,048
6.048
0
766
756 756
756 756
111)48
756 14.522 756
1994-95
3,024
756
756
5524
4,615
1995-96 1996-97 1997-98
3,024
5624
3,103 0 0
Total1993-98
0
0
6,048
756
756
756
11048
8,474
Total1990-98
6,048 !
6,048 !
6,048 |
1,512
1,512 •
1,512 |
221 !96 !
•)•) 447 I£6,791 i
1i
(Constant Prices 1988-8
Institutional StrengtheningForeign Technical Assistance Prograi
Iks, '000)
Category
II Equipment
Vehicles
Computers
Total
(at
(at
275
100
each)
each)
1990-91 1991-92
550
200
750 0
1992-93
0
Total1990-93
550
200
750
1993-94
0
1994-95 1995-9
275
100
375 0
i 1996-97 1997-98
0 0
Total1993-98
275
100
375
Total1990-98
825
300
1.125 !
(Constant Prices 1988-89)
! Category
[III Recurrent Expenditures
| Vehicle Operation
j Office Supplies I Expenses
! TA/DA
! Total
1990-91
120
480
240
840
1991-92
120
48ft
240
840
1992-93
0
Total1990-93
240
960
480
1,680
1993-94
0
1994-95
60
120
120
300
1995-96
60
12ft
120
300
1996-97 1997-98
0 0
(Rg. '000)
Total1993-98
120
240
240
600
Total 11990-98!
36ft;
1.200 :
720 !
2,280 !
III
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Annex 9
Investment Plan by District
Table 1 District Wise Investment Plan for Water Supply, Operationand Maintenance and Sanitation
Table 2 District Wise Coverage of Water Supply Schemes
Table 3 District Wise Cost Estimates of New water Supply Schemes
Table 4 District Wise Cost Estimates of New Water SUDPIV Schemes
Table 5 District Wise Coverage of Sanitation Plan
Table 6 District Wise Cost Estimates of Sanitation Plan
Table 7 District Wise Cost Estimates for O&M of New Water SupplySchemes
Table I
District Vise Investment Plan for Water Supply,Operation and Maintenance and Sanitation
(Constant Prices 1988-89) ids.'0001
Type ofActivity
Hew Water Supply{Scheies
{Operation and{Maintenance
{Sanitation
{Total
|
{Districti
{Gilgit{Baltistan{Diaiir
{Total
i
{Gilgit{Baltistan{Diaiir
{Total
,'Gilgit{Baltistan{Diaiir
itoUl
I
II
1990-91
13117
32
33
,224,866,246
,336
264237145
646
665232
150
,132
199
11,13,7,
32,
1,
33,
1-92
684406246
336
498505291
294
645432
150
780
1992-93
13137
33
1
35
,224,406,246
,876
763772436
,971
665432
152
,999
Total1990-93
383821
98
I1
3
102
,132,678,738
,548
,525,514872
,911
19616096
452
,911
1993-94
12139
34
11
2
37
,008,406,416
,830
,003,040624
,667
645238
154
,651
1994-95
12147
35
11
3
38
,918,360,876
,164
,261,328781
,370
645636
156
,680
1995-96
775
20
11
3
24
,668,290,706
,664
,416,473896
,784
564830
134
,582
1996-97
865
20
111
4
25
,298,966.724
,988
,580,613,010
,203
584632
136
.32?
1M7-Jt
9,2527,9205,400
22,672
1,7661,7711,118
4,655
604828
136
27,363
Total199J-98
5U.14449,94234,122
134,208
7,0257,2254,429
18,679
302250164
716
163,603
Total1990-98
88.27ti '88.62055,860
232,756
8,6508,7395,301
22,590
498410260
1,168
256.514
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII/t
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 2
District Vise Coverage of New Water Supply Scheies
[District
IGilgit:! Pop. Cov. (cui.)! X of Pop,! Covered 1cui,)
IB<istanI Pop. Cov. (cui.)! X of Pop.| Covered (cui.)t
iDiaiiri Pop. Cov. (cui.)! X of Pop.| Covered (cui.)
!Total Pop. Covered|X Pop. Covered
............
1990-91 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98
111,280 133,750 157,290 190,970 222.430 24M7i) 2»(),sl4U 321,21038,OX 43.8X 49.6% 58. ui 66,04 70,4* 76.11 iti.7%,
103.790 120,910 138,030 163,850 169,591.1 ill,010 233,50V ZM.45035.6% 40,IX 44.4X 51.IX 57.3X 61.vk M . M U.1%
48,150 60,990 73,830 88,810 107,400 126,000 146,Z40 167,700 !28.6% 34,9X 40.8X 47.3X 55.2X 62.OX 69.9% 77,3X|
263,221 315,651 369,151 443,632 519,422 585,982 6bO,682 753,362 I35,OX 40.4% 45.6% 53,OX 59.9X 65.2% 70.9% 78.1% J
Table
District Wise Cost Estiiateg of New Water Supply Scheies
(Constant
ii
District
Gilgit
Baltistan
Diaiir
Total
'rices 198
1990-91
13,224
11,866
7,246•
32,336
8-89)
1991-92
11,684
13,406
7,246
32,336
1992-93
13,224
13,406
7,246
33,876
Total1990-93
38,132
38,678
21,738
98,548
1993-94
12,008
13,406
9,416
34,830
1994-95
12
14
7
35
,518
,360
,876
,154
1995-96
7,668
7,290
5,706
20,664
1996-97
8
6
5
20
,298
,966
,724
,988
1997
9,
7,
5,
22,
-98
252
920
400
572
Total1993-98
50,144
49,942
34,122
134,208
UB. '000)
Total1990-98
88
88
55
232
,276
,620
,860 !
,756 i
Table 4
District Wise Cost Estiiates of New Water Supply Scheies
(Constant Prices 1988-89) IRs.'OOO)
iDistrict
IGilgitIBaltistanDiaiir
Total
Stall
No, ofScheies
943535
164
Village
Cost
30,45611,34011,340
53,136
Hediui
No. ofScheies
606456
180
Village
Cost
37,80040,32035,280
113,400
Large
No. ofScheies
13246
43
Village
Cost
20,02036,9609,240
66,220
No. ofScheies
16712397
387
Total
Cost
88,27688,62055,860
232,756
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 5
District Wise Coverage of Sanitation Plan
[Type of]Activity
(Motivation!(No. of Villages)
Demonstration(No. of Latrines)
!
[Districti
jGilfitjBaltistanIDiaiir
iTotal
IGilgit!BaltintanIDiaiir
!Total
1990-91
332616
75
16513080
375
1991-92
322716
75
16013580
375
1992-93
332716
76
16513580
380
Total1990-93
988048
226.
490400240
1,130
1993-94
322619
77
16013095
385
1994-95
322818
78
16014090
390
1995-96
282415
67
14012075
335
1996-97
292316
68
14511580
340
1997-98
302414
68
15012070
340
Total1993-98
15112582
358
755625410
1,790
11
I
Total90-98
249205 !130 I
584 !
,245 !,025 !650 !
,920 :
Table 6
District Wise Cost Estimates of Sanitation Schenes
(Constant
District
Gilgit
Baltistan
Diaiir
Total
'rices 1988-89)
1990-91 1991-92
66
52
32
150
64
54
32
150
1992-93
66
54
32
152
Total1990-93
196
160
96
452
1993-94
64
52
38
154
1994-95
64
56
36
156
1995-96
56
48
30
134
1996-97
58
46
32
136
1997-98
60
48
28
136
Total1993-98
302
250
164
716
(Rg.'OOO)
Total1990-98
498
410
260
1,168
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIt
Table 7
District Wise Cost Estiiates for Operation andHaintenance of New Water Supply Scheies
(Constant
jDistrict
IGilgit
[Baltistan
|Dia«ir
Total
Prices 1988-891
1990-91
264
237
145
646
1991-92
498
505
291
1,294
1992-93
763
772
436
1,971
Total1990-93
1,525
1,515
871
3,911
1993-94
1
1
2
,003
,040
624
,667
1994-95
1
1
3
261
328
781
370
1995-96
1,415
1,473
896
3,784
1996-97
1
1
1
4
,580
,613
,010
,203
1997-98
1
1
1
4
,766
,771
,118
,655
Total1993-98
7,024
7,226
4,429
18,679
(Rs.'000)
Total1990-98 '
8,550
8,741 !
5,300 !
22,590 ;1
Table 1Table 2Table 3
Table 1
Table 2Table 3
Table 1
Table 2Table 3
Table 1Table 2Table 3
Annexure 10
Alternative Scenario Analysis
Scenario 1 : Proposed Plan
Proposed Plan for Water Supply in Northern AreasEstimated Coverage of the Plan in 1993 and 1998Cost of Water Supply Schemes
Scenario 2 : Settlement size Prioritization
Water Supply Plan Based on Priority Coverage toSmall and Large VillagesEstimated Coverage of the Plan in 1993 and 1998Cost of Water Supply Schemes
Scenario 3 Existing Implementation Rate
Water Supply Plan based on Existing Implementation RateOf NAPWD & LB&RDEstimated Coverage in 1993 and 1998Cost of Water Supply Schemes
Scenario 4 100% Coverage Plan
Water Supply Scheme for 100% coverage in Northern AreasEstimated Coverage of the Plan in 1993 and 1998Cost of Water Supply Schemes
1I
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Scenario 1
Table 1
Proposed Plan for Water Supply in Northern Areas
1 11 1
{Institutions JDistrictsi _ i „i ii i
! PND {Gilgit! {Baltistan{Large Village {Oiatir
! !Totali ... it i
i ••:
i LBtRD and VOs {Gilgit :i ii i
{Stall t Hediui {Baltistan{Village Schemes!
{ !Totali . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i . . . . . . . . . .
! LB4RD and UGs !{ ]Diaiir :{Stall I Hediui |
{ {Total
Vill.Size
LargeLargeLarge
SiallHediuiSiallilediui
Stall !Hediui !
{1990-91
3. 4
1
8
11847
30
47
11
1991-92
251
8
11847
30
47
11
1992-93
351
9
11847
30
47
11
Total1990-93
8143
25
33241221
90
1221
33
1993-94
252
9
12847
31
48
12
1994-95
351
9
12758
32
48
12
1995-96
1265
4';
11
1996-97
12749
a
b6
12
1997-98
138510
36
56
U
total1993-98
5103
18
61362343
16c.
2335
58
fotai
1990-98 ,
13 :
24 ;
6 !
43 !
94 !60 !
35 !
64 i
ai !
35 ;
% ',
1 ;
Scenario 1
Table 2
Estiiated Coverage of the Plan in 1993 and 1998
,
{Districti
i
, • . _ . . . .
i
GilgitBaltistanDiamir
Total
Additionai
Siall
331212
57
:overed
Nediui
242121
66
villages990-93
Large 1
8143
25
otal
654736
148
[Total No[of vill[covered!(cui.)
[ 1993
147. 129
69
345
Pop.covered(cm.)1993
157.290
138.030
73,830
369.150
% OfTotal pop.covered
49.6*44.4%
40.8X
45.6*
Additional villages
Siall
61
2523
107
:overed
Hediui
364335
114
1993-98
Large
5103
18
fotal
1027661
231)
[Total No[of vill.[covered[ (CUM.)[ 1998
249205130
584
Pop.covered(cut.)1998
321.210
264.450167.700
753.360
* Of [Total pop.!covered [
83.7*72.7*!77.3*[
78.iv
Scenario 1
Table 3
Cost of Hater Supply Scheies
(Rs.'OOO)
t
1
1
1
Year
1990-91
1991-92,1992-93
1993-94
1994-95[1995-96!1996-97[1997-98
Total
(Large
No. of
PHDScheies)
Scheies Cost
889
99
43
12.32012.32013,860
13.86013.860
66,220
LB&RD «and VOs1 Stall & Hediui Scheies)
Sial
No. ofScheies
151515
1617171618
129
I
Cost
4.8604.860
4.860
5.1845,5085.508
5.1845.832
41,796
Hediui
No. ofScheies
151515
15151516
18
124
Cost
9.4509.4509,450
9.450
9.450
9.450
10.08011,340
78,120
TotalCost
14.310
14,310
14.310
14.634
14,958
14.958
15.264
17,1/2
119,916
L81RD and1Siall
Siall
No. ofScheie
444
444
65
35
Cost
1i
I
11il
1
11
296296,296
29629b,29b
.944
,o20
340
UGsI Hediui Scheies)
Hediui
No. ofScheie;
777
88766
5b
Cost
4,410
4.4104,410
5,0405.040
4.4103.780
3,780
35.280
TotalCost
5,7065,7065,706
6.3366.33b
5,7065.724
5.400
46,620
11II
firand, !Total [
1
11
32.336 i32,336 [33,876 [
I1
34,830 [
35,154 [20.664 [
20,988 [22,572 [
232,756 [i
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Scenario 2
Table 1
Mater Supply Plan Based on Priority Coverage toStall and Large Villages
!Institutions
! PHD
{Large Village! Scheaes
! LBttRD and VOs
|Sea11 I HediuiiVillage Schemes
I LBIRD and USs
!Stall & Hediui{Village Scheies
i
{Districts
i
iGilgitIBaltistaniOiatir
!Total
!iGilgit :jIBaltistanii
{Totali _ti
{Diatir :i
{Total
Vill.Size
LargeLargeLarqe
SiallNediuiStallNediui
StallHediui
{1990-91
341
8
13715
........32
173
20
1991-92
251
8
13765
31
174
21
•
1992-93
351
9
13776
33
174
21
Total1990-93
8143
25
39212016
96
5111
62
1993-94
252
9
14766
33
174
21
1994-95
i5I
9
14677
34
174
21
1995-96
14578
34
173
20
1996-97
14668
34
192
21
1997-98
15779
38
192
21
Total1993-98
10i
71313338
173
8915
104
total1990-98 (
Vi !24 ifc ;
43 i
no !S2 {53 {54 !
269 !
140 !26 !
166 !
Scenario 2
Table 2
Estimated Coveraoe of the Plan in 1993 and 1998
District
GilgitBaltistanDianir
Total
Additional villages
Stall
392051
110
covered
Mediui
211611
48
1990-93
Large
8143
25
Fotal
685065
183
iTotal No.lot vill1 covered(GUI.)1 1993
15013298
380
Pop.covered(cui.)1993
141.000125,40060,760
327,160
* OfTotal POD.coverec
444033
40
1
5*3*6*
4*
Additional villages
Snail
713389
19.5
:overea
Hediut
313815
84
1993-98
Larqe
5103
18
Fotai
10781107
295
{Total No.lof vill!covered! Icui.')1 1998
257213205
675
Pop.covered(cut.)1996
280,130234,300143,500
657.930
* Of !Total pop.!covered 1
73.0*164.4%;66. UI
68.2*1
Scenario 2
Table 3
Cost of Hater Supply Scheies
{Year
11990-9111991-9211992-93
11993-9411994-95,1995-961996-9711997-98
Total
1 PHD(Large
tHo. ofScheies
889
99
43
Scheies)
Cost
12,32012,32013,860
13,86013,860
66.220
L6&RD and VOs1 (Siall & Hediui Scheies1
Sial
Ho. ofScheies
201920
2021212022
163
I
Cost
6.4806.1566,480
6.4806.8046,8046.4807.128
52.812
Hediut
No. ofScheies
121213
1313131416
106
778
888810
66
Cost
.560
.560,190
,190,190.190.820.080
.780
TotalCost
14,04013,71614,670
14,67014.99414.99415,30017.208
119.592
L8&RD and(Snail
Stall
No. ofScheies
171717
1717171919
140
Cost
5.5.5,
5,5.5.6.t.
45.
508508508
508508508156156
360
\ HediuiUGsScheies)
Hediui
No. ofScheies
344
44i22
2b
122
2211l
16
Cost
,890,520,520
520520890260260
380
TotalCost
788
8877)
61
.398
.028,028
.028
.028,398.416.416
.740
<Rs.' 000)
! Grand! Total !
33> 34
36
3636222224
247
,758 I.064 i,558 i
,558 !,882 !.392 !.716 |.624 !
,552 !
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII1II
IIIIIIIIII1IIIIIIII
Scenario 3
Table l
Hater Supply Plan Based on Existing ImplementationRate of NAPHD and LB&RD
1 „.
JInstitutions
! PHD
{Large Village
! LB&RD
Stall & Hediui.Village Scheies
i
{Districtsi ..•i
i'fiilgit{BaltistanIDiaiir
!Total
IGilgit :1I
iBaltistant
IDiaiir :i
i .......
I Total
Vill.Size
LargeLargeLarge
SnailHediuiSnailHediuiSiailHediui
1990-91
j
1
8
243422
17
1991-92
251
8
243422
17
1992-93
351
9
243422
17
Total1990-93
8143
25
6
12
126
6
51
1993-94
252
9
3423i3
17
1994-95
3
1
9
i3X
37
3
17
1995-96
i3i323
17
1996-97
3i
4'/3
17
1997-98
i3l423
1?
Total1993-98
5103
18
IS16
12171015
85
Total1990-98
13246 '
43 1
il ;
28 I21 !2« :16 !
21 :
136 !
Scenario 3
Table 2
Estimated Coverage in 1993 and 1996
1
11
District
i .........
Gilgit
jBaltistanIDiaiir
{Total
Additional
Stall
696
21
;overed
Medium
12126
30
villages1990-93
large Total
8143
25
263515
76
{Total No{of vill.{covered{ (cut.)
I 1993
10811748
273
Pop.covered(cut.)1993
115 560
125.190
51.360
292.110
% OfTotal DOP.covered
36. Si
40.3*28.4*
36.1*
additional
(
Stall
IS1210
37
covered
Hediut
16
17IS
48
villages1993-98
larqe fotal
S103
18
363928
103
!Total Ko!of vill.Icoverea! Icut.i; H98
144
15676
376
POD.coveredICUi. 1
L998
7b'
201,240^8.040
485.040
i ofTotal pop
covered
55.3*
4i,2*
50.3*
Scenario 3
Table 3
Cost of Hater Supply Schemes
(fts.'OOO)
t1
It
|Year
j1990-91
!1991-92
!1992-93
t
11993-94
11994-95
!1995-96
!1996-9711997-98
iTotal
PHD(Large Scheies)
........
No. ofSchemes
889
9
9
43
Cost
12.320
12.32013.860
13.860
13,860
66,220
LBtRD(Stall t, Hediui Scheies)
Siall
Mo. ofScheies
777
70
817
... .
58
Cost
2.268
2,268
2,268
2.2682.592
2,592
2.2682.268
18.792
Hediui
No. ofSche§es
101010
10991010
78
Cost
6.3006.300
fe.iOO
6.300
5,670
5.6706.300
b.iOO
49,140
lotal
fcost
B.S68
8,5688.V>K
8,568
8.262
8,2628,5688,bb8
67.932
111
1
Grand |
Total :
1
2O.i)B8 !20.888 ;run !
22,428 !
22,122 1
8,262 |
8.568 1
8.S6S '
134.152 1
IIIIIIIIIIriiIiiiIi
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Scenario 4
Table 1
Water Supply Schete for 100% Coverage in Northern Areas
{Institutions
i PHD
{Large Villagei Scheies
! IBIRD and VOs
{Stall & Hediui!Village Scheies
! L81RD and UGs
{Stall 4 HediuiVillage Scheies
{Districts
{Gilgit{Baltistan{Diatiri
{Total
{Silgit :i
iBaltistani
{Totali .
iDiaiir :{
{Total
vill.Size
LargeLargeLarge
StallNediuiStallHediui
•
StallHediui
!1990-91
341
8
131178
39
198
27
1991-92
251
8
131179
40
198
27
1992-93
351
9
131178
39
198
27
Total1990-93
8143
25
39332125
118
5724
81
1993-94
252
9
141067
37
1810
28
1994-95
351
9
14978
38
189
27
•
1995-96
14879
38
187
25
1996-97
14969
38
206
26
1997-98
1510610
41
196
25
Total1993-98
5103
18
71463243
192
9338
131
Total '1990-98 !
1324 !6 i
43 {
110 !79 {53 j68 i
310 {
150 J62 !
212 J
Table 2
Scenario 4 Estimated Coverage of the Plan in 1993 and 1998
District
GilgitBaltistanDiaiir
Total
Additional
Snail
392157
117
covered
Hediui
332524
82
villages1990-93
Large
8143
25
rotal
806084
224
ITotal Noiof vill.{covered! (CM.)
1 1993
162142117
421
Pop.covered1 CUR.)1993
173,340151.940125,190
450,470
* OfTotal pop.covered
54.7*48.9%69.2*
55.7*
Additionali
Snail
713293
196
:overed
Hediui
464338
127
villages1993-98
Large Total
S103
18
12285134
341
ITotal No|of vill.!covered! |CUI.)| 1998
284
251
762
Pop.covered(cut.)1998
383.553363.99ft217.005
9b4,5S4
* Of !Total pop1
covered 1
loo.o*;100.0*1
toco*!
100.0*
Scenario 4
Table 3
Cost of Water Supply Scheies
\1
1
11
[Year
1990-911991-921992-93
11993-94,1994-9511995-961996-97,1997-98
Totali _ _ . . . .
(Large
No. of
PHDScheies)
Scheies Cost
88c
99
43
12.32012,32013,860
13,86013,860
66.220
LB4RD and VOs(Snail & Hediui Scheies)
Sial
No. ofScheies
202020
2021212021
163
I
Cost
6,4806.4806,480
6,4806.8046,8046,4806,804
52,812
Hediui
No. ofScheies
192019
1717171820
147
Cost
11,97012.600li.970
10,71010,71010,71011.34012.600
92,610
TotalCost
18.45019,08018.450
17.19017,51417,51417,82019,404
145,422
L6&RD and(Snail
Snail
No. ofScheie
191919
1818182019
150
Cost
6.1566,1566.156
5,8325,8325,8326,4806,156
48,600
U6Sit Hediui Scheies)
Hediui
No. ofScheie
888
109766
62
Cost
5.0405,0405.040
6.3005,6704,4103,7803,780
39,060
ii
i
1 Total! Cost
11.19611,19611,196
12,13211,50210,24210.2609,936
87,660
(RS.'OOO)
GrandTotal
41,946 !42.596 !43,506 1
43,182 I42,876 127,756 !28,080 129,340 1
ii
299,302 1
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIriiriiiiii
Annex 11
Financing Details of the Investment Plan ,
Table 1 Donor Investment Plan for Northern Areas in Current Prices.
Table 2 Breakdown of Taxes and Duties on Donor Components.
Table 3 Capital Requirements of the Proposed Investment Plan with NewDonor Assistance in Constant Prices.
Table 4 Capital Requirements of the Proposed Investment Plan with NewDonor Assistance in Current Price.
Table 5 Capital Expenditure of the Investment Plan.
Table 6 Recurrent Expenditure of the Investment Plan.
Table 7 Local and Foreign cost of the Investment Plan in ConstantPrices
Table 8 Local and Foreign Cost of the Investment Plan in CurrentPrices
Table 1
Donor Investment Plan For Northern Areas
(Carrent Pricei) (Ra.'000)1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
!Sector[Component
i
[Water Supply ScheieiILBUDi
Suitatioii
!Water Control andITestingi
[Huiao Resource[Developmenti
[Hygiene Rdacationi
!Institutional! Strengthening (LBUD)*1
i
llnititatioRalStrengthening (AIRSP)
i
[Imtitttt iomlIStreighthening (PHEC)ii
[InstiUtionali Strengthening (DOH)i
InstitutionalStrenghthening
!(IA Polytechnic)i
[InstitutionalIStrenghthening[(Foriegn Tecnical Aist.IProgru)i
ItvoWing Crediti
ITotal
1990-91
21,80)
175
1,562
S98
198
5,828i •"•• — - .
997
1,170
3,186
8,872
1,458
46,247
1991-92
22,893
184
44
785
171
2,568
441
437
546
10,383
2,694
41,147
1992-93
24,031
195
46
689
244
2,902— "' —
463
459
689
972
4,886
35,583
Total1990-93
68,132
554
1,652
2,473
614
11,298
2,066
4,422
0
20,227
9,038
122,977
1993-94
26,438
208
49
375
243
3,285
486
0
212
662
1,021
1,013
33,990
1994-95
27,785
218
50
388
196
3,669
503
0
623
70
7,315
978
41,796
1995-96
27,901
194
723
330
275
4,104
521
0
645
419
4,921
723
40,754
1996-97
29,334
204
341
210
4,599
539
0
205
150
35,581
1997-98
33,574
217
347
223
5,305
573
0
0
159
40,398
Total1993-98
145,032
1,040
822
1,782
1,146
20,961
2,622
0
1,685
1,460
13,256
2,714
192,520
Total1990-98
213,764
1,594
2,474
4,255
1,760
32,259
4,523
2,066 !
6,107 :
1,460 [
33,484 [
11,752 !
315.497 !
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 2
Breakdown of Taxes and Dutieson Donor Components
(Constant Prices 1988-89)i
{Sector{Componenti
{Sanitationi
{Water Control and{Testingii
jBuian Resource{Development
{Hygiene Education
{Institutional{Strenghthening (LBfcRD)
{InstitutionaliStrenghthening (AIRSP)i
{Institutional{Strenghthening (PHEC)i
{InstitutionaliStrenghthening (DOH)
{InstitutionaliStrenghthening!(NA Polytechnic)
! Institutional! Strengthening |(Foriegn Tecnical AsBt.i!Program) ji i
i
Total i
{Capital Invest-ment Required
1,168
{ 2,100
3,263
1,290
24,175
3,430
15,374
15,828
1,050
26,401
94,079
Taxes And Dutieson Components
1,168
1,9«3
3,263
1,290
23,650
3,375
15,141
14,648
1,030
26,236
91,784
(Rs. '000
RecommendedDonor Investment
117
525 I
55 {
233
1,180 {
20 '
165 !
2,2)5 !
Table 3
Capital Requirements of The Proposed Investment PlanWith New Donor Assistance
(Constant Prices 1988-89)
1
!Balance of 7th Plan
ii
19)0-91! 1991-92! 1992-93
EIGHTH PLAN
1993-94;i9)4-9511995-96!1996-971997-98
[TOTAL
CapitalRequireientsof InveBtient
Plan
,
81,24755,47451,392
46,04251,55836,29532,32134,405
368,734
ResourcesAvailable
(1)
. . . . . . . .
14,10014,80015,500
16,10016,80017,20017,70018,100
130,300
RecouendedDonor Assistance
•
(2)
. . . . . . . . .
39,65333,60027,674
26,17829,91228,18423,76825,360
233,329
TotalResourcesAvailable
53,75348,40043,174
41,27846,71245,38441,46843,460
363,629
(Rs. '000)
ResourceGap
(3)
7,4947,074 !8,218 !
4,7644,846 !
(9,089)'(9,147)(9,055)!
11
5,105 !
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
Table 4
Capital Requirements of The Proposed Investment PlanWith Mew Donor Assistance
(Current Prices)
{Balance of 7th Plan1t
11I
1990-91! 1991-921992-93
EIGHTH PLAN
1993-94,1994-95,1995-961996-971997-98
TOTAL
CapitalRequirementsof Investment
Plan
71,43267,93366,080
62,15772,04252,48348,38554,807
_
495,319
ResourcesAvailable
(1)
16,44518,12419,930
21,73523,47524,87126,49728,833
179,910
RecommendedDonor Assistance
(2)
46,24741,14735,583
33,99041,79640,75435,58140,398
315,497
TotalResourcesAvailable
62,69259,27155,513
55,72665,27165,62562,07869,232
495,407
U s . '000)
ResourceGap !
ii
(3) ;11
8,7408,66) !10,567 |
1t
|
6,431 !6,771 !
< 13,1431!(13,693)}(14,425)1
|
(88):1
Table 5
Capital Expenditure of The Inmtient Plan
Constant Prices 1988-89
SectorComponent
i .....
New later SupplyScheies
Rehabilitation
[Operation and! Maintenance (0*M)i
|Sanitation
!Hater Control and{Testing
{Huian Resource{Developient
{Hygiene Educationi
{Institutional{Strenghthening (LBIRD)ii
{Institutional1Strenghthening (AIRSP)
{Institutional{Strenghthening{(PHBC k urn)i
{Institutional|Strenghthening (DOB)
{InstitutionaljStrenghthening{(NA Polytechnic)i
{Institutional{Strenghthening{(Poriegn Tecnical Asst.{Prograi)
{Revolving Crediti
i "
{Total
1990-91
32,336
2,606
100
940
856
140
3,700
375
1,150
3,600
750[
1,250
47,803
1991-92
32,336
3,943
100
40
641
no
400
500
2,200
40,270
1992-93
33
3
3
43
,876
,560
100
40
536
160
400
600
,800
,072
Total1990-93
98,548
10,109
300
1,020
2,033
410
3.700
375
1,950
4,700
750
7,250
131,145
1993-94
34,830
100
40
278
150
200
300
750
36,648
1994-95
35,154
100
40
278
110
500
375
700
37,257
1995-96
20,664
100
228
160
500
150
500
22,302
1996-97
20,988
100
228
110
200
21,626
1997-98
22,572
toO
218
110
23,000
Total1993-98
134,208
500
80
1,230
640
0
0
0
1,400
450
375
1,950
140,833
Us.'0001
Total {1990-98 {
232,756
10,109
800 !
1,100 !
3,263 !
1,050 ;
3.700 !
375
1,950
6,100
450 !
1,125 !
9.200
271.978 !
IIIIIIIIIIIII1IIIII
Table 6
Recurrent Expenditure of The Investment Plan
(Constant Prices 1988-89
{Sector{Component
{New Mater SupplyIScheiesi
{Rehabilitation
{Operation and{Maintenance (OIK)t
{Sanitation
{Water Control and{Testingii
IHuian Resource{Development
{Hygiene Educationi
{Institutional{Strengthening (LB&RD)
{Institutional{Strengthening (AKRSP)i
{Institutional{Strengthening{(PHEC t MAPWD)i
{Institutional{Strenghthening (DOH)i
{Institutional{Strenghtheningi(HA Polytechnic)i
| InstitutionaliStrenghthening(Foriegn Tecnical Asst.[Prograi)
Revolving Creditii
Total
)
199
1
1
1
6
13
0-91
646
50
500
30
,822
535
,678
,216
,967
,444
1991-92
1
2
1
1
8
15
,294
50
30
,097
360
,678
,216
,479
,204
1992-93
1
2
1
1
8
,971
52
30
,257
360
,678
,216
756
,320
Total1990-93
3,911
152
500
90
6,176
1,255
5,034
3,648
16,202
36,968
1993-94
2
2
1
1
9
,667
54
30
,433
360
,678
,216
200
756
,394
1994-95
3
2
1
1
4
14
.370
56
30
,626
360
,678
,216
50
,913
299
1995-96
3
2
1
1
3
13
,784
34
500
30
,838
360
,678
,216
150
,403
,993
1996-97
4
3
1
1
10
,203
36
30
,072
360
,678
,216
100
,695
1997-98
4
3
1
1
11,
,655
36
30
330
360
678
216
100
405
Total1993-98
18
14
1
8
6
9
59
,679
216
500
150
,299
,800
,390
,080
600
,072
0
,786
Us,'0001
Total1990-98 :
22,590
368 i
1,000 I
240 {
20,475 {
3,055 {
13,424 {
9,728 {
600 {
25,274 {
0 !
96,754 {
Table 7
Local And Foreign Cost of The Investment Plan
(Constant Prices 1988-89)
{Sector{Component
{New Hater Supply Schemes{ Local{ Foreign
{Rehabilitation{ Local! Foreign
iOaM{ Local{ Foreign
{Sanitation{ Local{ Foreign
{Hater Control a Testing{ Local{ Foreign
{Human Resource Devlp.{ Local{ Foreign
{Hygiene Education{ Local{ Foreign
{Inst. Strengthening{ Local{ Foreign ]
tInst. Strengthening ',{(Foriegn Technical Asst. !{Program) !! Local {I Foreign 1
iRevolving Credit {Local {
I Foreign {
Local {Foreign {Total {
{ 1990-91
{ 32
: 2
85,
16,
1,
48,13,61,
,336
,606
646
150
500940
856
170
277799
229488
250
020227247
1991-92
32,336
3,943
1,294
150
40
641
140
5,805446
9197,560
2,200
47,4288,046
55,474
1992-93
33,876
3,560
1,971
152
40
536
190
5,975536
756
3,800
50,0601,332
51,392
Total1990-93
98
10
3
1
2
206
2,14,
7,
145,22,
168,
,548
,109
,911
452
500020
033
500
057781
148804
250
508605113
1993-94
34
2
5
44,1,
46,
,830
,667
164
40
278
180
990397
756
750
849193042
1994-95
35,154
3,370
156
40
278
140
5,984446
5394751
700
46,3215,237
51,558
1995-96
20,664
3,784
134
500
228
190
6,446446
5792824
500
33.0253,270
36,295
1996-97
20,988
4,203
136
228
140
6,469167
J U 6 4147
1997-98
22,572
4,656
136
218
140
6,6840
34,4050
34,405
Total1993-98
134
18
1
311
18,
1.
190,9,
200,
,208
,679
116
50080
,230
790
573446
118331
950
764857621
(Ha. '000)
Total1990-98 !
232
10
I'L
1
11
3
1
518,
3,23,
9,
336.32,
368,
.756 !
..„!
,590 !
.168 !
000 !100 {
263 {
290 {
630 |227 !
266 !135 ;
200 ;
272 !462 !734 i
IIIIIII1IJ111IIIII1
Table 8
Local And Foreign Cost of The Investment Plan
(Current Pricei) (Us.'000)
LocalForiegi
Total
Total Total Total1990-91 1)91-92 1992-93 1990-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1993-98 19.90-98
56,006 58,129 65,391 179,526 61,621 64,780 47,754 48,150 54,807 277,112 456,63715,427 9,804 689 25,920 536 7,262 4,728 235 0 12,761 38,681
71,432 67,933 66,080 205,446 62,157 72,042 52,483 48,385 54,807 289.873 495,319
